Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Working Classes Desserting To Ukip


crashmonitor

Recommended Posts

0
HOLA441

The thing is the EU is more than a single market.

Does CAP intensify competition, lead to efficient production and lower prices?

How about that deal Mandy sorted out a few years ago where we had to pay more for cotton based clothing because of EU import duties on Chinese imports that were set up to protect Italian jobs in the rag trade? Did that intensify competition and lower prices?

How about all the "convergence" money distributed through local politicians and spent largely on pointless projects. How does paying for this, and all the administration of it, intensify competition and lower prices?

On balance does the benefit of the single market outweigh all of the rest of it?

I used to support the EU, because l liked the fact that they appeared to operate based on principle and rule of law. Then the banks needed bailing out - which was against the state aid provisions of the treaty of Rome, and therefore illegal - and they just had a late night special meeting and waved the bailouts through as a special case.

Do you supported the EU until the banks were bailed out? I believe the banks were bailed out nearly everywhere in the world though, so hardly the EU's fault.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 67
  • Created
  • Last Reply
1
HOLA442

Do you supported the EU until the banks were bailed out? I believe the banks were bailed out nearly everywhere in the world though, so hardly the EU's fault.

I'm after good governance and the rule of law. When the crunch came, and on the defining economic issue of my lifetime, the EU failed on both counts. The fact that the US federal administration did the same is more of an argument against more federalism than for it.

What are your views on my other points?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2
HOLA443

There are clear economic benefits associated with being part of a large single market. Leaving the European single market will inevitably lead to a loss of UK economic competitiveness and make us all poorer. Has UKIP attempted to quantify this loss?

Not so clear. Apparently the % of our trade that goes to EU nations has not budged since entry. It seems to make bugger all difference, actually.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-27284489

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3
HOLA444

They're not presuppositions; they're basic economics. The benefits of being part of a large single market include a broad market for goods, making it viable to produce goods with sparse demand, and intensified competition, leading to more efficient production and lower prices.

What are the benefits of not being part of a single market?

The single market and the EU are not the same thing and there's every chance we could negotiate access to the SM whilst leaving the EU.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4
HOLA445

Not so clear. Apparently the % of our trade that goes to EU nations has not budged since entry. It seems to make bugger all difference, actually.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-27284489

It is widely accepted by economists that being part of a large single market facilitates trade and increases wealth, and your reference does nothing by itself to indicate otherwise. It could well be, for example, that you'd expect to increase trade more with developing countries as they develop. You don't know how that percentage would have changed without the UK being in the EU.

Being part of a common market doesn't just increase trade within that market though; it also increases trade with countries outside that market. If you are, for example, a Chinese widget maker, it would be cheaper to to make widgets suitable for sale to a large EU market than to a smaller UK one. This works the other way round too. It is easier for an outside country to specify that imports have to meet a single widely-used standard than to have to deal with less widely used standards.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5
HOLA446

The single market and the EU are not the same thing and there's every chance we could negotiate access to the SM whilst leaving the EU.

We could, like Norway and Switzerland, have the laws passed by the EU to implement the single market faxed to us. But then we'd have no say in their formulation. Which would be a shame, given that EU laws have drawn heavily on UK legislation up until now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6
HOLA447

It is widely accepted by economists that being part of a large single market facilitates trade and increases wealth,

Roger Bootle is an economist and he thinks we should leave Terry smith is no fool he thinks we should get out as well. We know politicians are crooks how many EU politicians have gone to jail? How are you going to police them?. how are you going to protest if they do something you don't like?

Even if we are financially worse off out side the EU some time politics matter. 56% of Britain's want to leave the EU and are being held prisoners against their will.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7
HOLA448

You don't know how that percentage would have changed without the UK being in the EU.

Indeed, hence why economics can't use the scientific method. That doesn't change the fact that assertions of the single markets absolute necessity are essentially pure supposition without much in the way of hard evidence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8
HOLA449

One difference between The United States of America and 'The United States of Europe' is that in the US, it is clear(ish) in what areas individual states have autonomy. California = no compulsory motorcycle helmets. (Last I heard.) Some states have capital punishment, some don't. New Jersey = you can't fill your own tank. afaik, none of these autonomies effect trade between states.

With the 'one size fits all' legislature that the EU is trying to force on us, we have open air French food markets facing a shutdown because of H&S even though there hasn't been a single case of food poisoning in 100 years for the market in question. A good example is when the EU mandated some stupid style of flooring for chicken coops. A chicken farmer built a coop with half traditional, half mandated flooring and the pic showed all the chicks crammed into the traditional half of the coop.

What we should be looking at is what laws stay within individual members control.

rant> for a country that absolutely beggared itself fighting WW2 in order to do what was right, it is beyond insult for us now to be told what is and what isn't 'human rights'.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9
HOLA4410

You don't know how that percentage would have changed without the UK being in the EU.

That cuts both ways, and thus doesn't change the fact that assertions of the single markets absolute necessity are essentially pure supposition without much in the way of hard evidence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10
HOLA4411

Ah, yes, the EU. A byword of financial corruption form the days of the Common Market and CAP. Nothing much has changed over the years except that the Common Market is morphing itself towards a United States of Europe, or something similar. Something we were told would NOT happen by our own lying politicians from Sailor Ted Heath to our current bunch of Cheer Leaders and Fifth columnists for the Brussels politburo. We have also be lied to time and again by EU and its Brussels mouthpieces over the matter of a "United States of Europe" (economical with the truth). It is common knowledge that this is the direction they want to take the EU.

Look at the backgrounds of the current EU leadership such as Barroso et al. Some of them come from Marxist, Maoist or communist backgrounds. Even the High Representative, Baroness Ashton, was the "bag lady" (Treasurer) of CND for some years. it was common knowledge that CND had been infiltrated by the old KGB, and was possibly funded from Moscow. Of course this will be denied by CND supporters.

So the current leadership of the EU are all "Good Comrades" who won't rock the boat - far too many hands in the EU taxpayers cash trough feeding their snouts.

The EU has expanded far to much, and too quickly. The demise of the EU has already been sown, along with the demise of the Euro currency, which was created for political reasons, NOT good financial or economic reasons.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11
HOLA4412

Ah, yes, the EU. A byword of financial corruption form the days of the Common Market and CAP. Nothing much has changed over the years except that the Common Market is morphing itself towards a United States of Europe, or something similar. Something we were told would NOT happen by our own lying politicians from Sailor Ted Heath to our current bunch of Cheer Leaders and Fifth columnists for the Brussels politburo. We have also be lied to time and again by EU and its Brussels mouthpieces over the matter of a "United States of Europe" (economical with the truth). It is common knowledge that this is the direction they want to take the EU.

Look at the backgrounds of the current EU leadership such as Barroso et al. Some of them come from Marxist, Maoist or communist backgrounds. Even the High Representative, Baroness Ashton, was the "bag lady" (Treasurer) of CND for some years. it was common knowledge that CND had been infiltrated by the old KGB, and was possibly funded from Moscow. Of course this will be denied by CND supporters.

So the current leadership of the EU are all "Good Comrades" who won't rock the boat - far too many hands in the EU taxpayers cash trough feeding their snouts.

The EU has expanded far to much, and too quickly. The demise of the EU has already been sown, along with the demise of the Euro currency, which was created for political reasons, NOT good financial or economic reasons.

I thought they were all mafia.

Joke in a part although I don't know if the mafia are involved with the EU I can't see why they wouldn't be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12
HOLA4413

One difference between The United States of America and 'The United States of Europe' is that in the US, it is clear(ish) in what areas individual states have autonomy. California = no compulsory motorcycle helmets. (Last I heard.) Some states have capital punishment, some don't. New Jersey = you can't fill your own tank. afaik, none of these autonomies effect trade between states.

With the 'one size fits all' legislature that the EU is trying to force on us, we have open air French food markets facing a shutdown because of H&S even though there hasn't been a single case of food poisoning in 100 years for the market in question. A good example is when the EU mandated some stupid style of flooring for chicken coops. A chicken farmer built a coop with half traditional, half mandated flooring and the pic showed all the chicks crammed into the traditional half of the coop.

What we should be looking at is what laws stay within individual members control.

rant> for a country that absolutely beggared itself fighting WW2 in order to do what was right, it is beyond insult for us now to be told what is and what isn't 'human rights'.

EU has no say on what goes on within a state - just what happens between member states. Bear in mind that the EU's basic decision process is state-based. The ECHR is stricly a separate matter. In that sense the EU has much less power than the US federal government.

What we're seeing with commission interference in national governments is very disturbing, and it is an attempt to seize a US style power, overseen by the IMF.

Political discussion is fair game, but when you give examples please cite sources, in the same way as Wikipedia - then we can have a reliable discussion instead of a Daily Mail hate fest. And please don't source anything from ... the DM.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13
HOLA4414

EU has no say on what goes on within a state - just what happens between member states. Bear in mind that the EU's basic decision process is state-based. The ECHR is stricly a separate matter. In that sense the EU has much less power than the US federal government.

What we're seeing with commission interference in national governments is very disturbing, and it is an attempt to seize a US style power, overseen by the IMF.

Political discussion is fair game, but when you give examples please cite sources, in the same way as Wikipedia - then we can have a reliable discussion instead of a Daily Mail hate fest. And please don't source anything from ... the DM.

Are you sure about that? You haven't cited any sources :)

How about things like the State Aid rules I mentioned earlier which forbid the government from subsidising commercial activity unless the intervention is approved by the Commission?

https://www.gov.uk/state-aid

The obligation under Article 108(3) of the Treaty to notify proposed state aid or changes to existing approved state aid is directly enforceable in member states courts.

Only the European Court of Justice has competence to review the legality of the Commissions decisions and actions in controlling state aid.

National courts uphold the rights of persons in the event of a breach by national authorities of the ban on putting state aid into effect without Commission approval. The courts must take steps on the question of the validity of decisions and recovery of unlawful aid.

The Commission and the Court have the power to fine member states for not complying with decisions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14
HOLA4415

Probably the primary purpose of the EU is the implementation of the European single market. This requires a common system of laws to be agreed between the participating countries. These common laws are currently proposed by the European Commission, whose members are appointed by the heads of state, and then passed or rejected by the European Parliament. Bearing in mind that the formulation of these common laws is a pretty technical business, how would you make the process more democratic? Or do you reject the idea of a single European market in principle?

Ever since a Parisian street trade short-changed me buying a flick knife, on a school trip, I've never trusted Johnny Foreigner.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15
HOLA4416

Ever since a Parisian street trade short-changed me buying a flick knife, on a school trip, I've never trusted Johnny Foreigner.

Everyone went to France to buy "flick-knives"! It was a tradition!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16
HOLA4417
17
HOLA4418

The EU is not the single market, that is the EEA. If we were to leave the EU we would still be members of the EEA and still have access to the single market under the 1994 agreement which effectively created the EEA. As explained here:

All arguments about the UK being isolated in terms of trade if it left the EU are irrelevant and a scaremongering distraction. It would provide a stepping stone on what to do next, for example rejoin EFTA or join NAFTA, or even both which would mean the UK would be in free trade groups of the two wealthiest continents on the planet - a sweet spot indeed. As a member of the EU neither memberships are permitted, as the EU is a political project all about control and bleeding wealthy countries to pay for infrastructure in Eastern Europe where many countries have flat taxes of less then 20%.

All the debate focuses around the UK in isolation. If the EU lost 14% of its GDP and a very large contributor other member states are going to have a reality check and start to wonder if the EU is really in their best interests as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information