OUT – from a non dramatically reformed EU.
mygreeneyedboy …..if you actually believe your own STAY IN ‘truths’, I can understand why you believe the OUT truths backed up by solid facts, are ‘untruths’ (what?). lol
Firstly, no one can deny that the current EU with 28 (whatever) governments and a small army of additional expensive bureaucracy in Brussels, Strasburg (wherever) is a cumbersome monolithic entity, that needs to oversee and control 28 different types of economies (large, small, barely existent), issuing new laws/red tape for all.
Next no one can deny via the likes of the Social Chapter etc, the hugely inefficient and expensive to run EU is looking for us all to work less hours a week, all have generous minimum wages and above, retire at 60-years old and have expensive cradle to grave State care – and why not, if that what this intra Europe trading ‘collective’ wants, what could possibly go wrong?
The Eurozone already has a European Central Bank and a ‘one interest rate fits all’ the hugely different economic size/structures, and a ‘one currency rate fits all’ Euro for those that adopted it, which basic logic tells that IF one interest rate and currency suited every countries economies, it would be a miracle.
So a partial solution has been for every country with different laws, taxes, benefits, pensions etc etc etc, to ‘harmonise’ them into the ‘collective’ and so what if that makes some country’s individually less or more competitive, it helps the EU bureaucrats to follow the member states better and make it easier to issue new bureaucracy and red tape. No mention of an EU Superstate, why bother the suspicious electorate with labels, when the whole this was happening via bureaucratic osmosis?
So pre 2007, there we have it, Europe was living the ‘collective’ dream, facilitated by a global economic boom for over a decade, every social objective seemed affordable, interest rates were at near record lows (especially for those new members who had only ever dreamed of borrowing at German government interest rates) and companies over taxed and over regulated, managed to do well DISPITE the ignorance of the EU and their individual governments, in understanding the massive competition within global trade.
Which government (or EU) was overly concerned there was a reason why the likes of China, with companies paying 1/5th our salaries, no limit on the hours of THEIR working week, and none of the additional costs of doing business i.e. government bureaucracy/red tape, employee social care expenses – could PRICE their goods at highly competitive rates, and were taking a growing amount of world trade at an alarming rate? None of them, we were living the EU dream, with the bulk of our trade amongst us mainly prosperous 510 million.
ONCE A MAJOR RECESSION HIT EUROPE, how many of those EU member states are NOW thinking about their huge annual government fixed costs, the weight on businesses shoulders of non competitive, inefficient, bureaucracy including employment costs/laws?
Currently even Germany who can rely on huge trade via a massive slice of trade/exports to the EU and the rest of the world, could possibly go back into recession, Italy is now entering its 3rd recession since 2007 - and France who similar to the UK in 2010 thought high EUesk Public Sector spending was the way to economic growth, despite then trying the coalitions approach, is forecast to have anaemic GDP for a year or so more and it’s unemployment rate that hit over 11%, will not go below 10% for that period.
SO WHY IS THE UK GROWING NOW, well unlike most other EU countries with less exposure to the fall in tax receipts from Investment Banking in the City, increased high street bank balance sheet growth/lending/consumption/debt, we had our major GDP hit around 2008 but kept our economy going with excessive government spending/debt, maintaining EUesk fat Quango expenditure, while allowing businesses/the Private Sector to collapse.
After 2010, by weaning the UK economic model off being an inefficient, bureaucratic mini EU and drove DOWN the costs of the Private Sector doing business, the UK is slowly becoming a SUSTAINABLE and balanced economy, hence our current GDP growth and 1.8 million new jobs.
BUT WHAT WAS THE EU’s ANSWER TO THE PROPLEMS OF AN UNWIELDY 28 NATIONS that still believes in the aims of ‘collective’, does not tackle the costs of government, agrees on little and relies on a ‘one size fits all’ approach – obvious of course, talk about FURTHER integration, but to what final solution, which bureaucrat would dare call it a Superstate?
So similar to the UK in early 2010, this blind bureaucratic EU ‘collective’, like the Borg, thinks the only way to sustainable (economic) world domination, is MORE OF THE PRE 2007 SAME, where the sheer weight of fat uncompetitive governance MAY still afford to look after the people of today, but if the Private Sector that supported those ‘nice things’ in a global economic boom is not given substantial help soon, the EU can not be the prosperous ‘collective’ they dream about.
So listen out for the socialist countries soundbites ‘we need to talk about job creation’ to solve the massive unemployment within the EU, as if all they do is ‘talk’ WITHOUT REFORM, the EU will be in a slow downward spiral of despair.
THE UK IS A TRADING NATION, but in early 2010 and still living the EU dream, we were doing more trade with Ireland than we were versus the combined trade of the mostly ‘emerged’ Brazil, Russia, Indian and China nations, with around 2.3 billion citizens between them –which after a global boom, was a ‘complacent’ national disgrace.
The City i.e. Investment Banking and Insurance, crosses all borders and although there will always be the need for those services, if the 2000’s taught us anything, it was that we can not rely on the substantial tax receipts to keep us afloat.
On that point, although our manufacturing halved from 1997 to 2010 - as the likes of China is becoming less competitive due to THEIR increased annual double digit pay increases etc, THE UK HAS A CHANCE with a lean government and low cost of doing business economy, to bring back those jobs ‘on shore’ we lost and others, especially if the EU competition’s bureaucracy and costs remain in place.
Conclusion; if the UK can be/remain a dynamic economy attracting businesses and creating jobs then we should LEAVE AN UNREFORM EU, but if we have a mini EU government that aspires to writing social cheques a cash cow Private Sector can no longer cover, we might as well remain with the good ship EU Titanic, and enjoy moving those deckchairs around for as long as we can. IMHO.
P.S. Re Norway - a small state, small population, oil wealthy, no 1970’s industrial shit/debts Norway you use is a bad example on many levels.
But re trade ‘choice’ is good, the Aldi/Lidl example here, offering LESS choice (with less costs of storage/smaller store size) thereby offering more competitive prices, appears to be the way forward. Isn’t Tesco slashing the number of new stores planned and selling off land as a result of the less choice model? How many different cans of baked beans are there, 20 or more? Great ‘choice’ but a waste of space commercially.