Off Topic The "Discuss Anything Else" Thread

I did the history of the European Union ages ago and it is all pretty accurately detailed on Wikipedia. So to the question:

In the 1970s, Edward Heath saw some merit in us joining the European Economic Community (EEC) so that we could do away with the trade tariffs that were damaging our industry and European trade with us. It also has to be said that he was prepared to turn a blind eye to the small print in the Treaty of Rome about the intended direction of travel of the EEC.

After we had joined, a referendum was held to ratify the decision, the ballot paper for which described our continuing membership of the “Common Market”, a phrase that had been used to keep the idea simple for the masses. Our membership was duly endorsed, but of course only the hardened anti-EEC campaigners actually knew why they did not want membership.

While it stayed just a European trade body, all was rosy in the garden, even if we did frequently have trouble getting our good into Europe because of peasants blockading the Channel ports.

It has all gone wrong since Maastricht, so all of our UK political parties share some portion of the blame. The Maastricht Treaty was on John Major’s watch and Gordon Brown had to sneak in the back door to sign the Treaty of Lisbon.

 

Can we try to envisage the future after Britain exits the EU. I'm useless at this but I'll have a go and wait for the corrections.

Our export trade to Europe could go pop (if the EU decided to tax us out of the market). More British unemployed as export dependent companies cut back on production, unless they can switch those exports elsewhere.
Britain could reciprocate by taxing imports from Europe. Currently we import more from Europe than we export so overall Britain would be better off (depending on the cost of unemployment). However, if we don't import so much maybe we would buy more British which would create more employment in Britain.

If the pound weakened we could export more and less people would take exotic holidays boosting holiday trade in Britain (from Brits and abroad). If the pound strengthened we could import more but also take cheaper holidays abroad.

So companies that don't depend on exports to Europe would flourish and those that do would either have to find new outlets or face possible shut down.

If imports from Europe were taxed out of competitiveness, European companies that export to Britain would (maybe) set up production units in Britain creating employment or in other non European countries in order to continue exporting to Britain.

Britain would control its borders however it sees fit and in general would be able to run the country without being constrained by European laws. Presumably Britain would no longer contribute to the EU and no longer receive funding from the EU. It would seem that Britain receives about 1/3rd of what it puts in (approx saving of £10bn pa). Germany, France and Britain are the largest net contributors to the EU (in that order). Only about half a dozen other countries pay in more than they receive. So I guess Britain would gain a lot of enemies as they will be seen to be the cause of lack of their funding they have been used to.

One day maybe it would be seen that Europe needs Britain and the entire EU concept would be re-designed with all potential members having the benefit of hindsight. Conversely, the EU may find itself better off and Britain would regret the decision.

In the former case Britain would be in a much stronger position to negotiate terms than it is now. In the latter case Britain would have egg on its face and I'm not sure what would happen.

It's all a bit of a gamble. It's looking a bit like If I lump all my assets on this Mullins red hot cert at odds on I'll be laughing (it's bound to win isn't it?). But if it doesn't I'm in the **** - "We are in the **** mate, we are in the ****"

 

Is this a wonderful piece of film or what?

 

This means I have another 15 years of misery

 

"Men aged 45-59 'most-fed up with life'"

Could hardly agree less. In many ways the golden years. In my case, at last felt I knew what I was doing in my job () after many painful years learning the trade in one or two ghastly places, was very well paid, saw a lot more of my family than the early days, and, really did enjoy the horseracing on my occasional visits to the UK (even won a bit sometimes; no small thanks to Timeform/Raceform!). No, they were not bad years at all.

 

Good grief, I'm not reading this thread any more, fills me with gloom. Europe surely is in the ****, period, EU or not? Russia, USA, I.S., Libya, Assad, etc., are all doing their best to make sure of that? And to think, a Tea Party evangelical nut case seems to be a front runner for president t'other side of the big pond.

 

Yes it is a good company, Stick, although they do sometimes balls-up with their CEO appointments; I could give two examples in this respect. John Browne (now goes under the grand title of Baron Browne of Madingley) was the best one they had in recent history. BTW, did you notice the share price of Premier Oil almost doubled overnight a few days ago, after its acquisition of E.On's northern North Sea interests? Did a contract with Premier early 90's, good people.

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-scotland-business-35459455

Not sure about the general share prices of oil concerns. Fracking has really screwed things up. Too many grey areas now, although the Saudis will probably manipulate something; they have to!
Erm, one question to you, and I'm not being rude, but you mention "Our View", whose view is this exactly?

 

When you read all the UK news online like myself everyday (Mail, Express, Telegraph, BBC, Guardian, few others) it seems the vast majority of people in their "comments" sections on EU articles are voting to leave. That along with everyone I meet at the gym, shops, cafes etc are all voting out, I have yet to meet any remain voter.
What about you guys?

 

Not sure I have a vote but, if forced, I think I would vote to stay in. The 4 year wait for benefits was a non starter and unreasonable in my view. The proposed phasing of benefits is more reasonable. I would vote in on the basis of "see how it goes", with the option to vote out later if it didn't work.

 

How about the EU having a separate vote on whether or not they want Britain to Exit.

please log in to view this image

 

haha not a hope they need our money. You must be mad if you voted to stay in the loony house of the EU to.

 

How do you come to that conclusion? I haven't heard convincing arguments either way so why jump?

 

Really anyone who votes needs to do their own homework and decide form that, I want out as stated but if we vote to remain I am not bothered as I agree with the majority.
Politicians getting rich off the corruption would be enough for me alone but I don't see a single thing the EU has done that could not of been done by us, so why pay for it. Amazingly the EC has published a report saying the movement of people has decreased living standards, that stands out a mile in UK.

 

I'm sure QM will correct me but I think we receive funding from the EU to the tune of about £10bn pa less than we put in That sounds a lot to me but in the grand scale of things I don't know how significant that is. If we save £10bn there but are £15bn (say) worse off somewhere else then we would be worse off overall. I just don't know what the net effect would be. I doubt that any public voter knows. Are there any figures

I'm not interested in emotional arguments. I would like to see the financial advantages and disadvantages proposed by both sides and each set of figures contested until we end up with a full set of figures agreed/accepted by both sides (or at least figures that can't be disputed). I doubt that any wonder economist is not biased one way or the other so wouldn't be convinced by any one person's figures.

NB I say "we" because although I live in France, I am English.

 

We certainly make a net loss from the EU in cash terms as you say. £10bn is massive, these days no amount of money sounds large due to media and government flippancy with figures. £10bn combined with £12bn foreign aid. Imagine what the Schools/NHS could do with £22bn.

 

True, provided we don't lose it all in other ways as a result of exiting.

 

Do not be too surprised that the Brexit camp are the most vociferous – so were the Independence camp in Scotland. Those clamouring for change (the malcontents) always make more noise than those that favour the status quo, because they are the ones with an argument to make.

There is no way that I will be agreeing with the majority if the fools vote to stay in the EU. I will be reminding them at every opportunity what a mistake they have made as eventually, just like the U.S.S.R. collapsed leaving the constituent parts in dire straits, the same fate awaits the European Union.

 

By the end of February, I have every expectation that our friends in Europe will have torn up Dave’s red card and rendered his insignificant reform requests totally redundant. Of the 160,000 Europeans that came to live/work here in 2015, the three biggest contributors were Poland, Romania and Bulgaria – three poor countries formerly under the Soviet yoke, desperate for subsidy from one of the few affluent Western European countries with a dynamic economy. Dave’s “National Living Wage” can only encourage more of them to come here, irrespective of what hand-outs are available, as it is more than triple what they can earn at home.

Dave is desperately trying to put a spin on this shambles as he wants to hold the EU Referendum in June. He faces opposition to this from Scotland and Wales because of the close proximity to their local elections in May. Given that both of those domains happen to be left-leaning pro-European, he does need them to show up at the polls. The main reason that he wants to have the Referendum early is because he knows that another summer of migrant plagues across Europe can only work for the Brexit campaign if the poll is held off until September.

 

I was relying on you QM to come up with some figures. I'm waiting to be convinced.

Savings from Brexit:

• Contributions to EU
• Foreign aid
• ..................
• ..................

Total (a)


Costs of Brexit:

• Funding from EU
• ..................
• ..................

Total (b)

Total (a) - (b)