Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Brexit

Germany on the brink of a recession

56 replies

Tiredofthelies · 03/09/2019 18:25

www.economist.com/graphic-detail/2019/08/29/fears-of-a-german-recession-are-rising

Germany, the biggest economic power house of the EU is on the brink of a possible recession.

As a brexiteer - I’m glad we are leaving the EU.

OP posts:
pikapikachu · 03/09/2019 19:02
  • The sooner people accept we are leaving the better, we voted for it, and we are going...

Most people think that we're Leaving but we would've preferred an orderly process where there was maximum preparation time like Y2K.

Leave won the referendum but not all Leavers believe in No Deal. Some would even be happy with remaining in the Common Market and cutting political ties.

Outsomnia · 03/09/2019 19:09

Oh let us see what happens for the umpteenth time, and whether or not a recession (forecast in most places now, it is part of the economic cycle) impacts on Britain if it leaves with No Deal.

Hmmm.

And the OP said s/he was glad to be leaving the EU as a Brexiteer. But no back up as to why that might be good. Hey ho, round the houses we go again.

All talk and no substance. Just have to look at Saint Johnson of the Statesmanship Order today.

Nods head.......And again......

mumwon · 03/09/2019 19:11

@Tiredofthelies could we point out that we don't use euros we have the pound so economically we have never been that tied into the eu.

Mistigri · 03/09/2019 19:23

The sooner people accept we are leaving the better, we voted for it, and we are going...m

Aren't you just a teeny bit worried about humble pie being on tomorrow's menu?

ElloBrian · 03/09/2019 19:32

Bit of a non sequitur there OP. What has the EU referendum vote got to do with the German economy? You’re sounding a little incoherent I’m afraid. Can you explain what the connection is?

Tiredofthelies · 03/09/2019 19:35

Here’s a perfectly valid reason of why, made previously by another poster:

So I recently started a thread about the misconceptions many remain voters may have about why people voted leave. I argued that there were many reasons other than immigration and that the majority voted fully understanding what the outcome would mean.

On that thread and many more on MN the remain voters keep asking us WHY we voted and are annoyed when we don't answer in full, they forget that since the result SOME have acted in an aggressive and belittling manner towards us, so why would we feel engaged to reply? Many leave voters have had to spend time defending themselves because we have all been branded thick and racist.

I am willing to say my reasons why I voted leave, even if it means I am attacked for doing so.

EU Commissioners

They are not democratically elected (by EU Citizens) and the President has the final say on any candidate that a member state has put forward. Technically they are accountable to the European Parliament by the fact that the Parliament is able to force the entire Commission to resign through a vote of no confidence. However the Parliament has never done this, but have threatened to do it once. It also needs 2/3 of the Parliament to vote and agree on the reason for the no confidence vote. We can elect MEP's but they have little power over the commissioners.

The commissioners are paid nearly £200,000 per year (some more) and also get generous allowances, benefits and a very good pension. I do not believe the current commission deserve that level of pay, they simply have not earned it, I believe they put their own self interests above EU citizens and I believe they are morally and financially corrupt.

EU Economy

There is very little growth and it is only going to get worse if the Eurozone fully collapses which I feel is a real possibility. Struggling EU nations such as Greece, Spain, Portugal and Italy are in massive debt, suffering with austerity and massive youth unemployment. I don't believe many of the of the other EU nations care about this, as long as the wealth benefits their country then they will pay lip service to those who are less fortunate. I also believe a lot of the benefits of the EU economy and the trade it brings also benefits the wealthier members of society more than the poor, in all of the EU member states.

If the EU had showed they would reform and a new fairer commission was set up which looked at making deals fairer for all EU member states and also looked at immigration in depth (not necessarily changing it) then I would have voted remain without a second thought.

However the commission proved what an arrogant bunch they are even before Cameron went to get his 'deal', they won't reform, they don't want to and they don't care who knows it.

UK Economy

The UK will be 6-8 billion pounds better off after no longer paying the EU membership fee, even after the grants we used to receive are taken in to account. However there were several studies that pointed out that the loss in trade will far outweigh the savings from leaving the EU and we will actually be worse off financially. I didn't doubt some of the facts in those studies and I could see how they came to their conclusions, however even those studies have to admit they can't say for certain because nobody knows how quickly we will get new trade agreements with EU member states and how favorably they will be. Additionally although EU membership did not prevent trade deals with the commonwealth and other countries, it did reduce the need and the imagination to. It is only when those deals are in place can you truly say leaving the EU has left us worse or better off. In the short-term we will be worse off, I knew that risk prior to voting.

Since the crash in 2008 many, many people in the UK (not just the British) have not seen any improvement in their wages or living standards. They have borne the brunt of austerity more than the people who could afford to. The 5th biggest economy in the world and an economy that has recovered and grown still has not brought any benefits to the poor and working class. They didn't consider how leaving the EU would affect their ISA's, Savings, Stocks and Shares because they don't have any! They didn't think about if their child could go to Uni because they would never have been able to afford that anyway. The poor and working class in the UK and the EU don't care if they are a bit worse off for a few more years, they are sick of the wealth that is generated only benefiting the wealthy, this was their chance to be heard.

Immigration

If the EU could have done one thing with immigration then I wish it gave all EU member states the ability to put a temporary block or cap on EU migration. I say this for the simple fact that the UK and other countries don't have the housing, schools and hospitals to cope with the current UK (not british) population growth, we simply aren't building enough of anything. When you add over 300,000 immigrants to that population growth you start to see the strain it creates.

I think the UK can cope with immigration well above 200,000, when it has the infrastructure in place, until then a temporary reduction or block until the work is done would be a useful tool to have. Alternatively you could look at using builders from the EU countries who could then come and work on those very buildings that are needed.

Finally on immigration, I think Governments in all EU countries need to act more responsibly on where and how immigrants are placed in to communities. Dumping some of the poorest immigrants in the poorest parts of the UK next to communities who are experiencing crime, unemployment and disillusionment with life in general and their prospects, is a disaster waiting to happen, especially when some of those people are known racists.

UK employers, EU employers and landlords in and out of the EU also need to be challenged more on their blatant exploitation of immigrants.

OP posts:
MrsTerryPratchett · 03/09/2019 19:40

the sooner people accept we are leaving the better, we voted for it, and we are going

Sounds so much better than: just over half of the people who voted indicated in a non-binding, illegally conducted, opinion poll lacking precedence in the UK, that they favoured leaving.

Still who cares about facts?

Tiredofthelies · 03/09/2019 19:41

The UK pays more into the EU budget than it gets back.

In 2018 the UK government paid £13 billion to the EU budget, and EU spending on the UK was forecast to be £4 billion. So the UK’s ‘net contribution’ was estimated at nearly £9 billion.

Why can this money not be going towards our own economy, building hospitals, schools etc where it is desperately needed!

Instead we pay out all this money EU when we are so badly struggling ourselves

OP posts:
Outsomnia · 03/09/2019 19:45

"The sooner people accept we are leaving, the better, we voted for it, we are going."

Off you go. Three+ years and still afraid to do it.

Why is that do you think?

GirlsBlouse17 · 03/09/2019 19:47

PMSL, I mean PMK!

ElloBrian · 03/09/2019 19:54

Hi again OP. Ok so taking your economic arguments :

I can’t see in your post a causal connection between the problems of the Eurozone and the U.K. economic relationship to it. Are you arguing that by being closely associated with it, the U.K. is somehow being economically damaged? If so, could you spell this out more clearly please so I can understand your point.

With regard to the point about the cost of EU membership, £9bn is 0.4% of U.K. GDP (£2.33tn£ in 2018).
Is that money well spent? Well, it compares to:
£38bn defence budget
£134bn NHS budget
£264bn benefits budget

So I hope that whether you agree with it or not, you can see that it’s relatively small in terms of U.K. government spending.

In terms of the principle of the U.K. being a net contributor, well the key point here is that many of the net recipient states are ex communist countries which joined the EU after the fall of communism and the U.K. was one of the biggest promoters of this expansion of the EU. The U.K. encouraged these countries to join the EU because it believed that in the long run the additional cost of helping them to develop would be repaid by the security benefit of them not staying in the Russian sphere of influence - it was a key moment in returning these countries to the western diplomatic orbit, where they were until Russia rolled in late in WWII. They had felt left behind by their wartime allies ever since. Was the U.K. wrong to seek to repay these eastern states’ loyalty during the war? Well, that’s a matter for debate. But that’s the reason for the net £9bn cost. (Plus all the economic benefits which I’m sure you’ve been told about before but presumably judging by your tone you just don’t believe).

jasjas1973 · 03/09/2019 19:55

and that the majority voted fully understanding what the outcome would mean

You really don't have evidence for that do you?

As for immigration, it was the Cons who stopped the supporting fund for communities most affected by immigration.....

Monies? yes we are a net payer, however we get frictionless trade and access to 60 plus FTA's
In the grand scheme of things, 6 billion in a 3 trillion economy is nothing, it would run the NHS for 2 weeks.
Its always a simplistic solution to say we will have this money back... we wont really.

EU going into recession will have a big affect on us, its our biggest market by far,

Oh and you criticize salaries but how about Persimmon CEO getting 75m ? for taking adv of Govt help to buy schemes, 200k in corporate terms is peanuts, perhaps we pay our politicians too little, so get monkeys?

ElloBrian · 03/09/2019 19:59

And on your points about austerity and immigration, those are wholly down to domestic government policy and while you may be dissatisfied with them, as am I, the EU is not responsible for them.

pikapikachu · 04/09/2019 00:43

What about the fact that EU migrants are net contributors to the British economy?

www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/eu-workers-uk-tax-treasury-brexit-migrants-british-citizens-a8542506.html

pikapikachu · 04/09/2019 00:52

I think it's debatable whether Westminster or Brussels is responsible for the North/South wealth divide. Austerity and the Credit Crunch was not the fault of Brussels.

www.myeu.uk

I'm not so sure that Westminster would have made the same investment decisions as Brussels.

NotSayingAWord · 04/09/2019 01:29

OP, I want to address your issues with migration, being and immigrant myself:

-We, Europeans, don't come to the UK for the good weather. The vast majority of us work, many of us in very respectable positions, most of us ARE educated. Unlike the brexiteers blocks who have never opened a book but don't think working in ASDA is a respectable job, so they live off benefits.A reminder- full time job= no housing, no benefits.

Europeans have been painted as refugees, but WE are not. In a way, we are escaping our countries since the lack of jobs, but we don't come to live off your budget. If anything, we are an important player in your economy.

Why don't you worry about those from other countries that come to your country with no skills, no will for work, and don't wish to associate with English culture. Those who bring their families with the sole purpose to get a british passport. Those (very few but real) who already hold a british passport and are trying to radicalize kids.

Smh

bellinisurge · 04/09/2019 05:39

Hmmmm, let's commit economic suicide through No Deal because Germany might go into recession. It's that kind of silly economic thinking that gets us in this mess.

bellinisurge · 04/09/2019 05:44

And this unelected Commissioners thing, as Johnson threatens to pack the House of Lords with unelected Tory Brexitpeers to get legislation through. 😂😂
Or they had to ask our unelected Head of State for permission to prorogue Parliament 😂😂😂😂
And judging by Rees-Mogg's uncharacteristic"you'll have to ask her" comment at the airport home when asked if the Queen was happy to see them, she probably bollocked them.

MysteryTripAgain · 04/09/2019 06:12

@Outsomnia,

Reason UK is still in EU is that deal has not been agreed and the cut off date of 31 Oct 2019 has not yet arrived. If deal is not made by that date one of two events take place;

Both EU and UK agree an extension (that would make three in total)

UK leaves EU without a deal.

bellinisurge · 04/09/2019 06:21

A Deal was agreed. It's just that yesterday's women/men in the ERG/DUP faction scuppered it in Parliament.
I read yesterday that Johnson was considering some sort of All Ireland economy arrangement where NI matches the EU rules to keep step with Ireland and protect GFA. Which is the border in the sea solution, that plenty of us have been harping on about on here.

MysteryTripAgain · 04/09/2019 06:39

@Tiredofthelies

You have given your list of reasons for vote leave and as an individual I would agree with all of them, but not in same order. However, I stand by my view that the majority of leave vote was based on two of the reasons you have given;

EU COMMISSIONERS not elected

IMMIGRATION

This was the big one. During the referendum the UK tabloids stirred up a lot of hatred towards immigrants. Lots of articles about immigrants going to UK for; free housing, benefits, sending child benefits back to their home countries, etc.

My list in order is:

EU Economy

10 paying in and 18 taking out is not sustainable as EU expanded too quickly. Too vast a difference in economies between West and East European Countries.

UK Economy

UK has trade deficit with EU that has grown since 1999 to 64 Billion even though it is the third largest donor to EU. Seems very one sided.

France just about breaks even with EU trade. Germany, however, has huge trade surplus from the EU of 160 Billion Euro and is effecting sucking wealth from the other EU members. Take a look at

www.cnbc.com/2018/08/06/to-protect-trade-riches-germany-needs-european-policies---commentary.html

UK has a trade surplus of 44 Billion with non EU Countries. So would make sense for UK to expand more into such Countries.

EU Commissioners

Yes not elected

IMMIGRATION

Bottom of list as there are some benefits to the UK.

However, in terms of non EU illegals, asylum seekers and refugees, the UK seemed to be the preferred destination and other EU countries seemed happy to allow transit through their countries to end up at Calais in hope they would make it across the channel. As per EU law, illegals, asylum seekers and refugees are meant to be managed by the EU country in which they first enter.

Theworldisfullofgs · 04/09/2019 06:44

By the way the EU Commissioners are like our civil service...but possibly more democratic.

Just because the mechanisms are different, it doesn't mean they are worse.

There's a book that explains it written by an english bloke.

berlinbabylon · 04/09/2019 07:37

Why can this money not be going towards our own economy, building hospitals, schools etc where it is desperately needed

Instead we pay out all this money EU when we are so badly struggling ourselves

Don't disagree on principle OP. But there is a MASSIVE but. No Tory government will invest in poorer areas. If there were to be a Brexit dividend, they'd cut business taxes, inheritance tax and fuel duty. They wouldn't spend the money on improving hospitals or schools (despite the soundbites at the moment - it won't happen). The EU on the other hand has invested in many of our poorer regions. I was at a castle in North Wales which had a sign up saying it had been funded by an EU project and that's just one example. Regeneration money has flooded into places like Liverpool (which voted remain).

bellinisurge · 04/09/2019 07:44

Massive amount of EU regeneration money in Wales. Suckered into believing Westminster would give even more.

MysteryTripAgain · 04/09/2019 07:54

A Deal was agreed

WA was rejected three times by MPs. As per the Gina Miller case the Supreme Court ruled the Brexit process had to go through parliament.

It's just that yesterday's women/men in the ERG/DUP faction scuppered it in Parliament

Which as per the Supreme Court ruling means that the WA was not agreed.

Wonder if Gina Miller ever reflects on her decision to go to court? Maybe T May could have got her deal through if it had not been for the Miller case?