Brexit?

[DeYaKen]

One of the economic arguments for leaving the EU is the Common Agricultural Policy that protects small uneconomic farming inside the EU and puts up prices of imported food, damaging third world food exports.

It was designed to protect small scale French farmers who have formidable political clout in France but it means EU consumers pay higher prices for food than free competition would provide. It also has benefits for wildlife and bio-diversity but those factors could be provided more cheaply without the CAP.

The main economic argument is the extensive and expensive regulation demanded by the EU on a wide range of goods and services. US citizens who complain about big federal government interfering in their lives have seen nothing like the rules set by the EU. Some of them are 'socialist' in the derogatory US sense of the word.

The UK, or other countries, could elect a right wing government but still be constrained by the left-wing bias of EU institutions.

Even if a UK voter isn't influenced by immigration or economics, the EU's management is a cluster-fuck. IF the EU could change? But see DeYaKen's post #41 above which explains why it can't.

What would be good for the UK, and for Europe, was a completely redesigned EU organisation. We are NEVER going to get that in the EU. Do we live with the EU as it is? Or do we want it to change drastically?

If we vote in, we vote for the familiar mess we have.

If we vote out, we vote for - we don't know what. It might be better. It could be worse.

And if we vote out, there is no guarantee that we will actually leave. You have to be here to realise that this is more than a referendum on Britain's place in the EU. By saying that he won't fight for another term as prime minister, Cameron has turned it into a Conservative Party leadership contest. He heads the Remain campaign and will be forced to stand down as prime minister if the vote goes against him.

The front runner for Cameron's job and the man spearheading the Leave campaign, Boris Johnson, goes on record as saying "I'm not against the EU as such. I am very unhappy with the so-called concessions the Prime Minister negotiated." Now bear in mind that our constitution does not require a referendum for us to join organisations like the EU. It is quite possible for Boris to give notice of our intention to leave and immediately start negotiations to keep us in.

 

[Hard_Rom]

An election just after NAFTA was signed almost destroyed the Conservative party here, as the electorate punished Mulroney and his party. NAFTA is still with us though. Same with our valued added tax the GST. Lost track of how many times someone wanting election has said they would get rid of it. In Ontario they just combined the two and dropped a % point. Oooh! Fooled us.

 

[oggbashan]

And if we vote out, there is no guarantee that we will actually leave. You have to be here to realise that this is more than a referendum on Britain's place in the EU. By saying that he won't fight for another term as prime minister, Cameron has turned it into a Conservative Party leadership contest. He heads the Remain campaign and will be forced to stand down as prime minister if the vote goes against him.

The front runner for Cameron's job and the man spearheading the Leave campaign, Boris Johnson, goes on record as saying "I'm not against the EU as such. I am very unhappy with the so-called concessions the Prime Minister negotiated." Now bear in mind that our constitution does not require a referendum for us to join organisations like the EU. It is quite possible for Boris to give notice of our intention to leave and immediately start negotiations to keep us in.

The vote to stay or leave is based on the EU as it is now.

The EU has a poor record of abiding by countries' democratic decisions about the EU.

I suspect that if Britain votes to leave, a few concessions will be offered if we stay - but those concessions won't be substantial - just enough to say "The EU has listened to the UK's voters, and look, we have changed".

 

[underguy1]

The Economic performance of the EU is not that bad in world terms and parts of it are still doing well. It is the headline grabbers of Spain and Greece that make it look a lot worse than it is. Much of the problems encountered by those struggling countries are down to the common currency. An experiment that was doomed from the beginning. Having a common currency without common fiscal control or taxation was always going to fail.

Frances youth unemployment is high but employment as a whole is not even approaching depression levels. Britain is an EU member, no unemployment problems there. Belgium, Ditto. Germany ditto, Sweden, the most neoliberal or downright socialist of them all, is doing well. In fact, it seems that Britain is the only country doing relatively well, having resisted what you call neoliberalism. Don't forget that the worst performer, Spain, was a fascist country not so long ago.

Are you serious? It's a disgrace.

Spain and Greece are just the headliners. They are the exemplar of the lunacy that rules in the EU.

The willingness to throw millions of real people on the scrap heap for their absurd ideology should tell people all they need to know about what the EU stands for.

Yes the Euro is the primary cause but it is the EU that has not only done nothing to fix it, but has actually doubled down.

 

[CharlieB4]

This is simply not true. Remove the subsidies provided by the CAP and farmers would have to become more business-like and demand a fair price from their customers. There is nothing special or romantic about farming it is a business. With no subsidies the market would be forced to pay more for the produce because they can't get it cheaper elsewhere. The difference is that with no one paying for surplus produce farmers would have to get better at managing production.
Some smaller farms would go to the wall others would concentrate on niche markets. The CAP has a dual purpose. It allows small farms (only 12 cows) to scrape a living. and it reduces the cost of food to the consumer. Neither of these is particularly desirable. For the benefit of those across the pond the CAP also guarantees a minimum price for farm produce. All the farmer has to do is produce the goods. If they can't sell it the EU will buy it at the minimum price. This has led to huge surpluses some of which has been sold at a loss and more often than that it has just been dumped. This has had some terrible effects on agriculture in third world countries. The EU sold off their surplus to those countries at prices below the local cost of production driving those farmers out of business.

Demand a fair price from their customers???

Farmers are price takers. Without trade barriers EU countries would get all their grain from low cost producers, Eastern Europe and Canada. Dairy from NZ where cost of production is a tenth of EU. Beef from South America.

 

[underguy1]

I seem to recall reading that a certain Windsor family of the UK were the biggest beneficiaries of ag subs in the EU.

I could be wrong but they certainly rake in quite a tidy sum.

 

[renard_ruse]

How the hell do I know what's going to happen? Ask Rory, he/she always knows what's going to happen ahead of time. Clairvoyance or something.

 

[renard_ruse]

That Jo Cox murder was either the most obvious false flag in history or the best stroke of good luck the establishment ever had.

Either it was a false flag or the guy was mentally ill, there was no possible benefit to the leave campaign from this.

 

[DeYaKen]

Demand a fair price from their customers???

Farmers are price takers. Without trade barriers EU countries would get all their grain from low cost producers, Eastern Europe and Canada. Dairy from NZ where cost of production is a tenth of EU. Beef from South America.

My post was in response to this, where you write solely about the Common Agricultural Policy

Originally Posted by CharlieB4 View Post
The CAP protects all farmers in the EU. English, Dutch, German and the rest would all fold if they had to solely rely on what they get for their produce on the world market. So unfortunately if the EU and therefore the CAP collapses then all countries in Europe would immediately reintroduce tariffs and trade barriers to protect their uncompetitive agricultural sector so consumers would continue to pay more.

I restricted my comments to the CAP, which should be scrapped, not to coming out of the EU.
I take it that by trying to change the subject, you accept that the Common Agricultural Policy is indefensible.

I find it puzzling that people think that free trade is good for every other business but not for farming. Industry has been struggling with the effects of globalisation for years and no one gave a damn. However, talk of opening up food production to global markets and people like you scream FOUL.

If we come out of the EU I have no doubt that sixty percent of our current EU contributions will be spent on farm subsidies. No party wants to be associated with a rise, probably only temporary, in food prices. One of our political parties is historically the party of the landowner. They get their income from farms and farm rents so they will protect them. There is also that fact that they would lose votes, especially in Scotland and Wales.

 

[DeYaKen]

Are you serious? It's a disgrace.

Spain and Greece are just the headliners. They are the exemplar of the lunacy that rules in the EU.

The willingness to throw millions of real people on the scrap heap for their absurd ideology should tell people all they need to know about what the EU stands for.

Yes the Euro is the primary cause but it is the EU that has not only done nothing to fix it, but has actually doubled down.

You might find it a disgrace compared to NewZealand but when you compare the 28 EU countries to others on the world stage you find that the countries in the North are doing OK. The economies of the new member states (eastern Europe) are improving. I am afraid you are going to have to spell it out for me what you mean by an "absurd ideology." Are you saying that it is absurd that countries can join together to operate under a common umbrella? Maybe you are of the mistaken belief that all the countries in the EU operate under a common political ideology.

You paint with a very broad brush. Perhaps you can explain what you mean by the lunacy that rules the EU.

 

[geronimo_appleby]

blah-blah-waffle-drone...

truth is, we won't know until the 24th which way it's gone, and it'll take another sixty years to figure out if the outcome - whichever - was the right one for the nation.

i couldn't give a fuck. i'm in thailand. the only thing that bothers me personally is the impact on the exchange rate.

 

[underguy1]

You might find it a disgrace compared to NewZealand but when you compare the 28 EU countries to others on the world stage you find that the countries in the North are doing OK. The economies of the new member states (eastern Europe) are improving. I am afraid you are going to have to spell it out for me what you mean by an "absurd ideology." Are you saying that it is absurd that countries can join together to operate under a common umbrella? Maybe you are of the mistaken belief that all the countries in the EU operate under a common political ideology.

You paint with a very broad brush. Perhaps you can explain what you mean by the lunacy that rules the EU.

Neoliberalism. Economic insanity. Austerity.

 

[oggbashan]

I think that the UK and the EU's political establishment mishandled the prospect of the referendum.

They seem to have assumed that remaining in the EU would easily have a large majority. Only a few days to the vote and no one really knows which way the vote will go.

Whatever the result, the campaigns have been disastrous for both sides.

 

[DeYaKen]

Neoliberalism. Economic insanity. Austerity.

I think you need to read "The Spirit Level" by Richard Wilkinson and Kate Picket

What you don't seem to understand is that Neoliberism, and Austerity are polar opposites. You can't have both at the same time. Austerity is all about reducing public spending whereas neolibetralism requires larger public spending.

If you are saying that neoliberism is economic madness, explain Sweden, Norway,Denmark, Finland and, to a lesser extent, Germany.

 

[DeYaKen]

I think that the UK and the EU's political establishment mishandled the prospect of the referendum.

They seem to have assumed that remaining in the EU would easily have a large majority. Only a few days to the vote and no one really knows which way the vote will go.

Whatever the result, the campaigns have been disastrous for both sides.

I think it has been pretty disastrous for the Tory party. Whichever way the vote goes the campaign has got so personal that they will have a huge job pulling the party back together.

 

[underguy1]

I think you need to read "The Spirit Level" by Richard Wilkinson and Kate Picket

What you don't seem to understand is that Neoliberism, and Austerity are polar opposites. You can't have both at the same time. Austerity is all about reducing public spending whereas neolibetralism requires larger public spending.

If you are saying that neoliberism is economic madness, explain Sweden, Norway,Denmark, Finland and, to a lesser extent, Germany.

I read 'The Spirit Level' a few years ago.

You are clearly confused about what neoliberalism is. Austerity is neoliberal policy to (purportedly) balance fiscal outcomes.

The reality is that it's about privatising public services and extracting rent.

 

[Jessie_Pinkman]

http://i4.dailyrecord.co.uk/incoming/article8228508.ece/ALTERNATES/s615b/Map-of-who-backs-what.jpg

 

[Conager]

It is illogical to leave

I think it was quite logical for the thread to leave the PG it would have simply been buried in the alphabet threads.

 

[Scotsman69]

I pointed out in this thread on Friday that her death would dent the 'leave' campaign, and all the signs are that it has, and seriously. Hell, even UKIP has joined the Tories and LibDems in declaring it won't contest the by-election to replace her, and the 'leave' racists have toned down their 'little Englander' xenophobia. A veritable sea-change.

All the evidence suggests that the man accused has serious mental health problems. No surprise. Racists are either mentally ill, or pigshit ignorant.

That Jo Cox murder was either the most obvious false flag in history or the best stroke of good luck the establishment ever had.

Either it was a false flag or the guy was mentally ill, there was no possible benefit to the leave campaign from this.

 

[DeYaKen]

I read 'The Spirit Level' a few years ago.

You are clearly confused about what neoliberalism is. Austerity is neoliberal policy to (purportedly) balance fiscal outcomes.

The reality is that it's about privatising public services and extracting rent.

OK, we are clearly using different definitions of Neoliberalis. I certainly don't want to get into an argument about that.

Using your definition most of Europe isn't. All of the Scandinavian countries operate on the basis of high taxation with plenty of state funded, and operated services. Germany, Netherlands and Belgium are not far behind.

The prime mover behind privatisation in Europe has been The UK. It is interesting to note that most of the directives on privatisation give a date by which each member state must start to work towards privatisation. They do not give a date by which it must be completed. A prime example of this is the mail system. The directive said that each state must have started to work towards opening the mail system up to competition. Britain did it immediately, meaning that the Dutch and German state owned mail handling companies took over large chunks of the market. However, in their own countries they interpreted the ruling literally and in 2011 they started to hold meetings to discuss how they could open up to competition. There is still no competition in those countries' mail provision.

The austerity being forced on countries like Greece and Spain is being done purely to pacify the people of countries like Germany who are haveing to pay for the bail-outs. In my opinion, this is grossly unfair. Those countries are in the mess they are in because they lied in their declarations when they applied to join the Euro. The movers behind the common currency, mainly France and Germany, knew they were lying, but turned a blind eye in order to expand their grand vision. If you remember the days of the Escudo, the Peso, the Lira and the Drachma, you will also remember how unstable those currencies were. The appeal of joining a currency whose stability was guaranteed must have been huge. If those countries could devalue they wouldn't be in half as big a mess as they are. The Greek and Spanish economy were always heavily dependent on tourism. When the europeans, especially the Brits found themselves having to cut back, they couldn't afford the prices. The knock-on from that is what has triggered the collapse.

If you read The Spirit Level, you will know why the Scandinavian countries weathered the storm better than most of the rest of the world. What you seem to have forgotten is that those countries, with the exception of Norway and Iceland, are members of the EU.

 

[DeYaKen]

I pointed out in this thread on Friday that her death would dent the 'leave' campaign, and all the signs are that it has, and seriously. Hell, even UKIP has joined the Tories and LibDems in declaring it won't contest the by-election to replace her, and the 'leave' racists have toned down their 'little Englander' xenophobia. A veritable sea-change.

All the evidence suggests that the man accused has serious mental health problems. No surprise. Racists are either mentally ill, or pigshit ignorant.

Don't you find it interesting that left wing terrorists and religious terrorists are simply evil people, but right wing terrorists are mentally disturbed?

 

[Scotsman69]

Ha, well done! I thought from your stories that you must be an OK guy.

Don't you find it interesting that left wing terrorists and religious terrorists are simply evil people, but right wing terrorists are mentally disturbed?

 

[srgreene]

Ha, well done! I thought from your stories that you must be an OK guy.

Right wing terrorists don't have a 1400 year old ideology supporting them. They do not have a worldwide network with access to the most influential media to distribute their hate. At least today, they represent the fringe; they are not normative in any society. Finally, and again, this may only be true today, they do not represent a threat to civilization and all that I value in this world.

But hey, otherwise they are just the same!

 

[underguy1]

OK, we are clearly using different definitions of Neoliberalis. I certainly don't want to get into an argument about that.

Using your definition most of Europe isn't. All of the Scandinavian countries operate on the basis of high taxation with plenty of state funded, and operated services. Germany, Netherlands and Belgium are not far behind.

The prime mover behind privatisation in Europe has been The UK. It is interesting to note that most of the directives on privatisation give a date by which each member state must start to work towards privatisation. They do not give a date by which it must be completed. A prime example of this is the mail system. The directive said that each state must have started to work towards opening the mail system up to competition. Britain did it immediately, meaning that the Dutch and German state owned mail handling companies took over large chunks of the market. However, in their own countries they interpreted the ruling literally and in 2011 they started to hold meetings to discuss how they could open up to competition. There is still no competition in those countries' mail provision.

The austerity being forced on countries like Greece and Spain is being done purely to pacify the people of countries like Germany who are haveing to pay for the bail-outs. In my opinion, this is grossly unfair. Those countries are in the mess they are in because they lied in their declarations when they applied to join the Euro. The movers behind the common currency, mainly France and Germany, knew they were lying, but turned a blind eye in order to expand their grand vision. If you remember the days of the Escudo, the Peso, the Lira and the Drachma, you will also remember how unstable those currencies were. The appeal of joining a currency whose stability was guaranteed must have been huge. If those countries could devalue they wouldn't be in half as big a mess as they are. The Greek and Spanish economy were always heavily dependent on tourism. When the europeans, especially the Brits found themselves having to cut back, they couldn't afford the prices. The knock-on from that is what has triggered the collapse.

If you read The Spirit Level, you will know why the Scandinavian countries weathered the storm better than most of the rest of the world. What you seem to have forgotten is that those countries, with the exception of Norway and Iceland, are members of the EU.

Being sovereign with your own currency is far more than about 'devaluation'. It means that you have control over fiscal policy and have the ability to use it countercyclically over the business cycle and you don't have to borrow money to do so.

The problems for the periphery are a direct result of the flawed structure of the euro. Any country running a trade deficit that cannot create its own currency will go broke. Especially if your main trade creditor runs a mercantilist trade policy like Germany does.

Austerity is being imposed because neoliberal dogma doesn't allow for central bank direct funding of government. There is no good practical reason for it.

But neoliberals/neoclassicals don't understand money and banking. Nor do the general public.

There is little to nothing in The Spirit Level that is relevant that I can see. You'd have to explain further.

As for a downturn in tourism being the cause of the crisis, you're barking mad.

 

[Hard_Rom]

http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/brexit-vote-facts-uk-1.3642351

http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/mark-carney-brexit-1.3481199

Britain leaving EU in 'Brexit' a risk to U.K. economy, Mark Carney warns

The head of the Bank of England described Britain's potential exit from the European Union as the single biggest domestic risk to the nation's economy — even as he insisted the bank would remain neutral in the debate.

"The issue is the biggest domestic risk to financial stability because, in part, of the issues around uncertainty," Carney said. The debate over continued EU membership also has the potential to "amplify risks" surrounding trade and investment, housing and financial markets, he said.

However, he said international risks, such as recent volatility in China, were a greater problem for Britain's economy.

Carney said that "without question" Britain's financial center would lose business if the nation decides to leave the EU but fails to negotiate mutual recognition agreements to replace the current "passport system," which allows financial professionals to work freely throughout the 28-nation EU. He also said he was aware that some financial firms were making contingency plans to relocate should Britain vote to leave the EU.


*London was not always the world's financial capital. And there is always the possibility of it losing that distinction. The Dutch would be dancing in the streets if Amsterdam could regain that distinction.*