I am still avoiding Facebook as many of my friends are posting some rubbish and i am not falling out with them over this. A great friend of my of 20 years has posted non-stop stuff about another referendum and i don't have the heart to tell them that their time would be better spent looking forward.
Todays NY Sunday Times Editorial SundayReview | Editorial How to Revive the Promise of the European Union By THE EDITORIAL BOARDJULY 2, 2016 Photo please log in to view this image Credit Lisk Feng Far-right politicians in Britain, France and other European countries blame the European Union for all the real and perceived problems of their countries. Many of their arguments are wildly off base, but there is also good evidence that the union urgently needs reform. The complaints against the E.U. are somewhat different in each of its 28 member nations, but they reflect similar frustrations. Many Britons voted to leave the union because they wanted to restrict immigration from other European countries and to get rid of E.U. regulations. The Five Star Movement in Italy wants the country to leave the euro currency and return to the lira to revive a weak economy. And the French nationalist politician Marine Le Pen said in March that the E.U. was “the death of our economy, our social welfare system and our identity.” Ms. Le Pen and her ilk have found a receptive audience for their nativist and isolationist views because many people have lost faith that the E.U. and its officials can deliver the stability and prosperity that was the purpose of the European project. In recent years, the failure to find a unified response to the flow of refugees from Syria, Africa and elsewhere has further damaged the E.U.’s reputation. Whether or not Britain ultimately leaves the union, it is now up to leaders like Chancellor Angela Merkel of Germany, President François Hollande of France and Prime Minister Matteo Renzi of Italy to reform the E.U. or watch its credibility and effectiveness drain away further. One of the most basic critiques of the union is that it is not democratic. This is an exaggeration, but it includes a kernel of truth. Of the E.U.’s three main institutions, the most powerful is the European Council, which is made up of 28 national governments. Its decisions, which are subject to political compromise, rarely reflect the pure preferences of the people of any of its member nations. Then there is the European Commission, which negotiates trade agreements, enforces antitrust rules and proposes legislation. Voters do not directly elect the commission’s president; instead, the president is selected by the European Parliament. While voters in every member nation do elect the 751-member Parliament, its members cannot introduce legislation and have limited control over the union’s budget. As a result, the Parliament is weak and doesn’t actually dictate the union’s direction. Reforms to this opaque structure could include making the Parliament more central in decision-making. Another improvement would be to let Europeans directly elect the president of the commission, which would make that office more accountable to the union’s citizens. Though nationalists are sure to rail against greater European unity, addressing Europe’s big challenges — like the refugee crisis — will require just that. The E.U.’s current leadership made that crisis worse by leaving Italy and Greece to handle it on their own with little assistance. And the E.U. policy requiring refugees to seek asylum in the country where they first arrive has created further disruptions by encouraging people to travel across the continent in an effort to get to the country of their choice. Recently, the union agreed to create a long overdue European border and coast guard operation, which will help manage migration and security. Officials need to go further by centralizing the registration and screening of refugees and resettling them based on the capacity of countries to accept them. This means that E.U. members will have to share more resources and intelligence. Another big challenge is Europe’s weakened economy, now made even more unstable by the uncertainty surrounding Britain’s departure. Some countries, like Greece and Spain, have suffered such a steep decline in living standards that a full recovery could take decades. Even in better-off countries, like France and Italy, unemployment rates are still above their pre-financial-crisis levels. In Britain, which does not use the euro and where the government has done more to revive the economy, median wages surpassed their precrisis level only last year. The E.U. could strengthen the European economy by restructuring the debt of weaker countries. It could increase public spending to stimulate private investment and boost consumer demand. Another important idea, creating a European deposit insurance system to protect savers, was proposed years ago but has not yet happened. From its earliest days, European integration was built on the idea that it would guarantee peace and, with a single market, ensure greater prosperity across the continent. In many ways, it has achieved those goals. But it is alarming that Brexit and its fallout have emboldened those who seek to dissolve this union.
The EU as we know it will be dead in 6-10yrs. Too many bureaucrats that know nothing about individual countries culture and people's needs. They interfere on a daily basis and now those people are rebelling. The EU in principle was a good idea but hasn't moved with the times and has become an unrealistic ideology of a few businessmen. I know the Brexit team has said it on numerous occasions but look at the youth unemployment in Greece, Spain, Italy. It is a shame that the EU is geared up simply for big business (especially German) because that will be it's downfall. I just hope that when the house of cards come tumbling down we get a decent team to rebuild it from the bottom up.
I'm intrigued. I just thought that Spain, Italy and Greece were the worst hit in a global recession. What did the EU do that made them so bad?
It was a genuine question. I know Greece hid the extent of its debts (and the EU bailed them out). Spain's banking industry was badly hit and I'm not sure about Italy.
I posted a long list which, because the four horseman of the apocalypse are not yet knocking on your door asking to come in for a cup of tea and a slice of Victoria sponge, you dismissed.
What in your list was not foreseeable by the British electorate when they went into the voting booths, bearing in mind the apocalyptic warnings from Remain?
The British electorate were told to ignore these risks because they were put forward by 'experts' who were corrupt and working for the interests of 'big business' and 'the establishment'. The electorate may have a different opinion now, and certainly in a few months time. Who to trust Johnson, Gove and Farage or the Institute of Fiscal Studies? Do you think the result would be the same if we had another referendum with the same question next week?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/...heres-little-hope-for-Greeces-unemployed.html My argument is that if you are part of this group (which is supposed to be fair and help the counties that need more help) how can problems like Greece happen. It's common knowledge that Germany gets richer while the smaller ones suffer. Now i am not saying that we should work harder to help these countries but something needs to be done. I am not blaming everything on the EU but it has contributed to problems.
This is not new evidence, Stan. There won't be another referendum, and if there was, I doubt many would predict the result. Most got the first one badly wrong.
Problems like Greece happen because whilst the premise of the EU is sound, promoting the Eurozone without full fiscal integration is not. The Greek issue happens when there's such disparity between economies that share the same currency and cannot adjust exchange rates to support their country's finances. They end up slashing benefits and raising taxes to raise cash and it just spirals downhill.
It was the same though with the Remain lot. They predicted WWIII and the whole country would be swallowed by a black hole. Today the FTSE is it's highest since 2012 and every country said we shouldn't leave remember? Funny how Australia/New Zealand/Canada/USA and many other countries want to deal with us. Both sides used project fear but it's up to us to decide who we believe.
I can't see there being any reason to support a second referendum on the same issue so soon after this one. As we get close to "Article 50 Day", we'll either have a plan for thriving in a Brexit world or we won't. In the scenario where there is a plan and everyone can see how it will work, then the government will vote in Parliament to pull the pin and execute that plan. In the scenario where there is no plan that looks like working other than one of sticking to an idealogical action despite it being a good idea, then who knows what will happen. Either way, theres no need for another referendum and it's a waste of energy to keep asking for one.
Why can't Tony Blair just F*** off and crawl back into his little hole! The bloke is a war criminal who took our brave young soldiers into war on a lie. He knew there was no WMD. Glad i never voted for that muppet. Now he is trying to unbalance the Brexit to cover up his forthcoming inquiry. Muppet traitor needs to go to prison.
We tend to believe people who reinforce our existing views and bias mate. I agree that the Remain campaign presented their case completely incompetently. But aside from WW3, all their promises/threats could still come true. With the Leave campaign we have well documented lies about NHS funding and immigration levels from some of them. As you say, it's up to us to decide who to believe. As I have noted above in reply to Durbar, there are reasons that the FTSE 100 is doing ok, keep your eye on the 250. Of course other countries want to trade with us, they all do already. It's whether we want to trade with them in the context of a trade agreement that is interesting.
The opposition party have a duty to test the plan thoroughly, but not ultimately to thwart the will of the majority of the British people
The final situation won't be known for ages. I don't remember anyone saying Armageddon would happen on Da. y One. Neither did anyone say we'd control our borders or rewrite our laws on Day One. Watch the FT250 for a more realistic guide to the value investors are basing on UK-centric business. We all now understand the FT100 primarily comprises global businesses that trade in currencies other than £ Sterling. Therefore, investors will value owning their shares more (and therefore, keeping their price up) because they will not be affected in the same way by Brexit as many of the FT250 will. Of course those countries will want to trade with us just as much as they do now, if not more. They'll see this as a sales opportunity. I hope we can sell them things in return. They won't be using our Euro financial services if we leave the EU, that's for sure. It's too early yet to feel good about Brexit being the right choice. It is, however, the choice we've made, so we should try our best to make it as good as possible for all of us.
