The EU Referendum is nearly upon us.........23rd June.

[Daisyonthegreen]

I have been invited by other posters to start a new EU Referendum Thread as the EU thread "In out shake it all about what to vote in the EU referendum "is now closed.
Anyhow this vote is is pretty crucial for the good of the country and your family.
I make no secret of the fact I feel to vote to Leave is the best option.
On the "In out shake it all about,what to vote in the EU Referendum " Thread I posted many links and gave views on why I feel that way.
I feel we would flourish free of the beaucratic ,undemocratic organisation it has turned into.
A Trading block initially started up with 9 countries in the 1970s has become out of control,mammoth and unwieldy and frankly rather dangerous.
We need to wrest back control of our own country,our borders and our ability to broker our own Trade deals which the EU insists on doing for us.
Plus our own Judicial decisions.
We on leaving would still Trade with the EU,they need us more than we need them actually but the beauty of it we could be free to broker our own deals with the rest of the world on our terms.
In short we would flourish.
We can love/ like Europe but not be in the EU.

Chalala That's exactly the crux of the issue, isn't it? There is no doubt that the EU is all about greater unification. The basic point is the extent to which people can imagine this working in their future vision. I must admit, I find it almost impossible to conceptualise largely because, in my experience (and, I think, in most people's experience), this is an entirely new concept for us all. I can see how the US works, despite its size, but will European voters ever feel enough affinity with one another to be able to exist in a pan-European way? This is outside our sphere of experience, so it's not really surprising that people don't want to try untested changes that Remain represents. Indeed, in some ways, Remain represents the greater leap into the unknown.

Opinions differ.

We can agree on that! Lol

I believe it's a two way street: every irresponsible borrower has a corresponding irresponsible lender. Keeping money tight and rolling over the debt did everything to protect the irresponsible lenders and nothing to ease the burden on ordinary Greeks.

So when I consider the EU, I don't listen to what they say they are going to do. I consider what they chose to do in a crisis, both the financial crisis and the immigration crisis, and use it as a guide of what they are likely to do in the future. I am pretty disappointed in their performance in terms of competency and values.

The EU, and Germany in particular, did everything it could to help Greece sort itself out

I disagree, banks in Frankfurt should have taken a "haircut." It was socialism for corporate elites and barefaced, 19th century style capitalism for the "little people."

That's an interesting opinion.

Are you under the impression that no loans were written off?

How many billions of new loans do you think were made to Greece, and how many do you think will ever be paid back?

Is it your opinion that the taxpayers of France, Britain, Germany and Italy should have paid for Greece's bankruptcy? Or do you know a good fairy with a magic wand?

Of course some loans were written off, but not enough to be anywhere close to fair. No, I don't think tax payers should have paid. I think some banks should have been allowed to collapse.

How much do you think was written off?

How much do you think should have been written off?

If a bank collapses, and there is a Deposits Protection scheme guaranteed by the government, who do you think pays? A good fairy?

fourmummy there's no doubt that this was the original intent, and is the logical direction. But if Britain stays in, I could see the EU continue to hobble along finding uncomfortable compromise solutions that don't satisfy anyone. Which in my view is one of the few good arguments for Brexit!

Personally I absolutely feel European and would be quite happy with a democratic US of Europe. But that's my personal view, and I accept it's the minority view in Britain by a very long way.

If a bank collapses, and there is a Deposits Protection scheme guaranteed by the government, who do you think pays? A good fairy?

Condescending much?

I believe the payments to wrap up the bank once netted off, would pale in comparison to the financial cost of a lost decade for Greece. And why, morally is okay to bail out irresponsible bankers, but ordinary people should pushed to poverty? Why would we want that? The purpose of money is to trade with, not to horde.

So let's see your non-condescending explanation of how your idea "No, I don't think tax payers should have paid. I think some banks should have been allowed to collapse." works.

I gather my questions about write-offs were also too difficult for you.

Piglet, I was reading the papers as this all unfolded, as I assume you did. I am not interested in digging up all the numbers and squabbling over them.

I do not believe that Greece is suffering to protect us. I believe Greece is suffering to protect global elites.

Please explain what this means:

"Of course some loans were written off, but not enough to be anywhere close to fair."

When you can't say how much was written off, and how much should have been

Please explain what this means:

" I don't think tax payers should have paid"

Can you suggest somebody else who would have paid?

I don't think Greece is suffering to protect the global elites as such, I think Greece is suffering because of Merkel's ideological belief in fiscal responsibility, and also to set an example to the other eurozone countries.

That's why I don't understand why it's being used as a Brexit argument. Unfair as it is, the alternative was making Greece pay, or making European taxpayers pay. I'm fairly sure most Brexit voters preferred plan A.

I believe both Greece and the banks would have been saved with even lower interest rates and looser monetary policy.

1. Banks find it quite easy to make money with higher inflation. It's hard to make money with near zero inflation because there is no room for the "spread."
2. Greece would have found the internal adjustments it required much easier to make with inflation.

It was obvious, and a classic response. But no, the EU didn't do that. Why not? Well, who benefits from "hard money"? Creditors. Who are the creditors? Germany. Super high net worth families and individuals who hold bonds and other nominal assets. Real bond values sink with inflation.

Inflation is good for net debtors.
Austerity is good for net creditors.

It looks to me like the net creditors interests were preserved at the expense of the debtors.

Who are the debtors normally? The poor. The young. People who have asked for investment capital to actually go out and do something productive.

No progress on the levels of write-offs, or the source of funds that is not a taxpayer, then.

Last time Piglet. no write offs needed if monetary policy had been humanely conducted for the good of all.

But Lookingagain, I thought Germany's main creditors were the eurozone governments, in which case I don't understand how the loss could have been absorbed by anyone except taxpayers?

(not an economist here, so please use simple words )

So Chalalala one way to solve all this is through paying down debt with inflated money. Creditors don't like it, but ppppfffft!

Right, I get the inflation thing, what I don't get is that in this case the creditors who don't like it are other European governments, i.e., us?

Personally I don't have an issue with the principle btw, I'd much rather pay to bail out the Greeks than to bail out banks.

To know that Turkish is to be adopted as an official EU language can only mean one thing ,Turkey will join the EU and heaven help us if we do not LEAVE the EU.
We will be forced to accept the Shenghen agreement(open borders) with potentially 500 million people having the right to come to the UK.I said POTENTIALLY but even if a fraction came we
haven't got the Infrastructure ie schools,hospitals,houses,roads.
www.euractiv.com/section/languages-culture/news/meps-call-for-turkish-becoming-eu-language/
Vote LEAVE.

Some nations were creditor nations. Southern Europe generally wasn't rich enough to buy all those German made goods. So, essentially, Germany sold them on credit. When the bubble burst (which Germany helped to stoke) Germany didn't want to be paid back with inflated money. It wanted to be paid back in "hard" money.

Low interest rates is what got Greece into trouble in the first place.

Daisy

do you have any evidence to support your wild "We will be forced" claim? It looks like just another ridiculous scare story spread by the anti-foreigner campaign.