BREXIT

ads:

Are these German academics you list the same people who constantly take Mario Dragi and the ECB to court for every decision they make and always lose?

Micky the lists are to long to have mentioned everything, I own and run 3 business's in the UK so I do have some knowledge of what the EU is, and how it has affected us here, my last post was to point out the crap that Cameron is / wanting / intending to put in place and we are supposed to believe him over the stuff he spouts about the dangers of leaving, now that he's finally cracked...Rocket ships...Driverless cars, come on now.

Norway I know has never been a full member but it was told that if they didn't join fully Norway would be finished...Blown up....Destroyed, it's still prospering.

And if you believe that Cameron has done fantastic changes with the EU for the UK because we are in it 100% then you also believe that we are all to get (What he said some years ago) Super Speed Internet everywhere...Start recruiting police again (dropping them)...Make the NHS work better (Book in and watch what happens)...Secure the country (Scrap the ships, Sack the Troops) And so on and so on.

Sorry but some people have to face facts, he don't want us to leave, cushy job when he leaves number ten, like the rest of them one way or the other, it's as simple as that, he couldn't care less about the UK. 

He's running scared because he's suddenly found out the British People really do care about England, Great Britain, call it what you will.

Fact is there are NO EXPERT on exiting the EU. It is all false evidence pit out by one side or the other. The only people with experience of leaving the EU are Greenland ers.  They did it and you can Google their experience. But essentially they were unable to fish their waters and since that is their main income stream they found they could not survive. Out of the EU they are able to fish and now have their livelihoods back. 

I have worked extensively in Europe over tge last 25 years. Mainly France, Germany, Belgium, Denmark, Latvia. The main difference theor government have over those of the UK is a vested interest in looking after their own country and people. Ours, what ever their political colour do not appear to be interested in the UK at all. The Germans and French break all the EU rules to ensure that the result is good for their country. They are correct in my opinion. Germany has no worries about lending it's companies funding using interest free loans if it will grow that company, particularly in another country. This is against EU rules, it was recognised by Vincent Cable. The UK government still refuse to lend our companies in the sane manner. The French and Germans will not allow any foreign company, even if that company has set up operations in France or Germany, to be involved with their infrastructure eg rail, roads. I have experience of trying to get involved. Legionella is well known in Britain, Spain etc and there have been controls in place for many years. German only implemented these controls 2 years ago.

Do you really think Ryan air will put their fares up just because of Brexit? Ryan air has a business to run. It's main customers are Brits going to Spain. If we leave the EU  and Ryan air puts it's prices up, it would lose business and after a while it would rethink it's prices and drop them. Customer pressure has made Ryan air rethink it's prices and attitudes before. The Spanish rely heavily on us Brits going to Spain. We spend a lot of money there and if we have a house, I have 2, do you think they will kick us all out or take action that will discourage us from going there. Of course not. They need us and our money. Recent years have been hard because we decided to go elsewhere such as Turkey etc.

We are probably one of the largest markets for German cars or cars in general so tge Germans and French are still going to want to try to sell us cars at a good price.

So it leaves the overhead of paying for tge 10000 people who work in the EU offices who simply push paper and prop up their own bosses by being a tram of 5 or whatever. I have just become aware of a local MEP who employs 5 assistants, one in each of several countries to interpret new policies. These people are all on huge salaries and expense accounts and in my opinion contribute nothing to society. There is also the upkeep of 90 glass towers to house these people. We have to pay for this and I don't detect what benefit they provide.

Many of these quangos like the IMF,  the Tory and Labour parties have long since represented people but have become empires of people propping up people higher up. It is contrary to modern business practice in the private sector but in the public sector, despite austerity measures placed on the working people is accepted in the EU.

I have run a successful business over the last 25 years making businesses more cost effective and profitable. I have a home in Spain which I use a lot. I will vote OUT based on the fact that we should not support the hugh overhead of the administrators of the EU and due to the fact that the government of the UK is not strong enough to resist, as do the Germans and French, the idiotic and wasteful rules that the EU administrators invent to pretend they have real  jobs which they don't. 

I am not anti Europe , I am anti EU and waste. I do realise that for a short period and when we leave we will have to rethink our relationships and how we want to operate. We will need to get rid of Cameron and Corbyn mob and elect someone that supports Britain and our future.

If we stay things in Britain will continue to decline. Of we leave we have a chance to make changes.  Just as Greenland managed to do. Let's take that opportunity

Yes, Greenland did well, didn't it. Except that it still receives EU funding and has a free trade agreement with it as it is part of Denmark. It took 15 years to sort all that out. In fact, it still receives about 7% of its budget from the EU and its people are still citizens of the EU due to its status as an Overseas Territory of Denmark. 

Nothing is as simple as it seems. 

Mickeyfinn you ask "Are these German academics you list the same people who constantly take Mario Dragi and the ECB to court for every decision they make and always lose? "

Is this with regard to the following?...

Draghi is a member of the Group of Thirty founded by the Rockefeller Foundation. The Group of Thirty is a private group of lobbyists in the finance sector. For this reason he is accused of having a conflict of interest as president of the ECB. Some parties also see Draghi's former work at Goldman Sachs as a conflict of interest.

Beginning in 2013 Draghi was criticised in the context of the scandals rising around the bank Banca Monte dei Paschi di Siena (MPS) which was making very risky deals.

Concerns were also expressed during the candidacy about Draghi's past employment at Goldman Sachs. Pascal Canfin (MEP) asserted Draghi was involved in swaps for European governments, particularly in Greece, trying to disguise their countries' economic status. Draghi responded that the deals were "undertaken before my joining Goldman Sachs [and] I had nothing to do with them", in the 2011 European Parliament nomination hearings.

In February 2012, Nobel prize laureate in economics Joseph Stiglitz argued that, on the issue of the impending Greek debt restructuring, the ECB's insistence that it has to be "voluntary" (as opposed to a default decreed by the Greek authorities) was a gift to the financial institutions that sold credit default insurance on that debt; a position that is unfair to the other parties, and constitutes a moral hazard.

The European Central Bank president has launched a robust defence of the institution’s independence after criticism from Germany that rock-bottom euro interest rates are hurting savers and fuelling rightwing nationalism.

Mario Draghi used his latest press conference on Thursday to counter an attack from Germany’s finance minister, Wolfgang Schäuble, who had said record low rates were causing “extraordinary problems” for German banks and pensioners and risked fuelling the rise of Eurosceptics in Germany.

Asked about the UK’s June referendum on EU membership, Draghi said: “The participation of Britain in the EU is welcome,. As for the risk of [Brexit] affecting the stability of the eurozone, the assessment our staff is that the effect will be limited.”

Sadly Greece’s debt is also under scrutiny again….

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2016/may/09/greece-financial-emergency-tragic-absurd-imf-debt-relief

One MEP who put his name to this Sunday Times letter is a member of The European Conservatives and Reformists group,which was created in 2009 to campaign for urgent reform of the European Union.They state:

We believe it is time to make Europe work again: both economically and for its people.  Bringing together 75 MEPs from 18 EU countries, we are currently the third largest group in the European Parliament. The ECR’s founding ideals are based on the Prague Declaration, which calls for an EU of openness, transparency, and particularly eurorealism.

The eurorealism concept distinguishes the ECR’s agenda from the other political groups. We believe in a new direction for the EU, which does not destroy the organisation or undermine cooperation.

However, we want to steer the EU away from the ideological march towards a European federal super state and towards a more flexible organisation that listens to and respects people in all of its member countries. Instead of clinging to outdated ideals of European integration we believe in equipping the EU with the practical solutions required to rise to today’s challenges.

We want to make the EU open for trade, closer to its people, living within its means and delivering value, and respectful of the diversity across Europe. Above all, we want an EU of cooperation and common sense.

This doesnt sound like someone not to be trusted, does it? So when this MEP suggests " But EU reform is a losing battle and many of us envy the British for having this debate and this referendum " it begs many questions.

This message was last edited by ads on 18/05/2016.

This message was last edited by ads on 18/05/2016.

No not entirely ads. My remarks related to the current ECB policy of printing money known as QE.

http://www.euractiv.com/section/euro-finance/news/eu-court-rejects-german-group-s-claim-against-ecb-s-bond-buying/

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/5683ba6e-1b5e-11e6-b286-cddde55ca122.html#axzz494vmOC86

The European Central Bank has come under renewed pressure in Germany, after a group of academics and business people filed a complaint at the country’s highest court over the monetary policymakers’ mass bond-buying programme.

These same people have tried many times to get the courts to overturn policy decisions by the ECB and always fail.

Former New York mayor warns against Brexit 

The former New York mayor has warned that Brexit would leave British-based "employees worse off".

Writing in The Times this morning, Michael Bloomberg claims leaving the EU could push financial services jobs to cities such as Paris and Frankfurt.

The billionaire businessman has signed a letter along with a number of the major companies investing in the UK, warning of the potential dangers of Brexit.

The Bloomberg index of superforcasters this morning put the likelyhood of the UK voting to leave the EU at 22%.

It's no secret that Cameron has asked 500 top business's to talk about the downfalls of the UK leaving the EU.

It's said he, Bloomfield, employs over 4.000 people in the UK within various industry's, a lot of investment for sure, if the UK did leave does this mean he would cut back on these workers and his investments, like in cutting of your nose to spite your face, considering making money any way possible is one of his hobbies.

Another scare mongering story perhaps reported in the media.

Former New York Mayor warns against Brexit

Well that's it then. 

I'm trying to look to the wider picture here and wonder if this is correct in terms of analysing if Brexit is in the UK citizens best interests..

The German Central Bank (Bundesbank) is opposed to bond buying, saying its akin to bailing out states (such as Greece, but presumably also any other eurozone state that gets into difficulty). Bond buying is a form of quantative easing (printing money) but this also has a downward knock on effect on the value of pensions, hence the growing concerns by some of its citizens leading to a growth in eurosceptics in Germany and of equal concern by a growing rightwing element.

But the European Central Bank (President Mario Draghi) supports an unlimited bond buying programme to lower struggling eurozone countries borrowing costs but only if its Govts agree to a reform programme in return for that eurozone funding. So the critical point then becomes who decides what that reform program should be, at what pace, and at what cost to its citizens? Who effectively is then in control of that country.....and it appears to be the lending Banks. (This immediately appears to place the Bank in a controlling position to dictate the reform programme....and the Bank have never been elected by the citizens of that country)

The terms of agreement result in further control by these Banks to a raft of "demand-destroying" measures, which ironically leads to very high unemployment. (Hence citizens need to leave their country in search of employment.) All monies earmarked for Greece in terms of the bailout (and any other country indebted to the IMF and ECB)  go straight back to the ECB and IMF to pay off their debts, allowing no progress, and in the case of Greece this has led to a great depressioin. All of these attempts to keep the country within the eurozone then appears to leave that country so endebted to the Banks that they are effectively controlled by the Banks (totally undemocratic).

But the knock on effect is that the remaining eurozone countries have to be "open" to citizens desperately in need of work, whilst their originating country becomes part of a downward spiral....

So my question is, why commit to remaining in European Union when more and more poorer countries could potentially be following the same downward route as Greece just to prop up the eurozone, (with measures in place by the Banks to take greater control of their affairs) whilst at the same time leaving ourselves vulnerable to growing pressures to accommodate those understandably seeking work. Isn't this a system doomed to failure?

As for the British who are out of the eurozone, it appears that the European Union is trying to control us in a differnet manner, via controling our ability to trade with other countries outside of Europe, which in itself will result in a  growing dependancy on the European Union.

So given all of the above, can someone please identify why greater pressures are not being put upon the Euroepan Union to reform away from what appears a downward spiral effect with potentially greater and greater control of our lives by a federal state and the Banks and IMF (albeit indirect control)?

Or perhaps the only way to be in greater control of our lives is to exit the European Union?

Also aren't these academics now identifying genuine concerns relating to control engineered by a federal state and the ECB and IMF? Why are these concerns not being adequately communicated to British citizens in this decision making process?

@Ads

As for the British who are out of the eurozone, it appears that the European Union is trying to control us in a differnet manner, via controling our ability to trade with other countries outside of Europe, which in itself will result in a  growing dependancy on the European Union.

Sorry, but where does that come from? Are you saying the UK can't trade with America, Australia, Japan or whatever? Of course they can and do. There's already been over 26 billion dollars worth of trade between US and UK just the first quarter of this year.

UK has a trading agreement with Australia and many, many other countries in the world. What it can't do is give them preferential treatment over EU countries like, for example, making import duty lower than France does. 

The EU is currently in negotiations with over 50 countries to enhance trading which the UK will benefit from. 

That statement makes no sense at all when UK trade with the rest of the world is more than it is with the EU. 

And regarding the EU citizens coming to look for work. So? Many Brits go to other EU countries to look for work, in fact about the same amount from our 1 country in the EU as all those EU people in the UK. How to control it? Maybe UK having something like a register of EU workers (shock, horror! I wonder if other countries have thought of that?) or obeying EU rules on not being a drain on the social security or welfare system.

You do hark on about "changes" so what about the statement by the Prime Minister about the agreements that will come in place if the UK votes to remain?
This one, for instance:

We have also secured a breakthrough agreement for Britain to reduce the unnatural draw that our benefits system exerts across Europe.We have already made sure that EU migrants cannot claim the new unemployment benefit, Universal Credit, while looking for work.And those coming from the EU who haven’t found work within 6 months can now be required to leave.At this Council we agreed that EU migrants working in Britain can be prevented from sending child benefit home at UK rates.

Yes, changes. 

Thanks for some clarification Mariedav re our trading arrangements, but do you not foresee problems with the current eurozone system and control moving away from a democratic process to a federal state of Europe and the growing power of the ECB and a downward effect on eurozone countries? Is this current system in the best interests of its citizens?

You are right to highlight the need for a register of EU workers but how do you deal with this retrospectively? Has the UK Govt commited to such a register and  wont the UK become an even greater magnet for EU workers in the interim period before such controls are enacted? Also this doesn't appear to take account of the stresses on the educational and health system and housing problems in those parts so badly affected by unplanned EU migration into the UK.

ads;

Your assumptions about workers from the EU coming to Britain assume the British economy will continue to outperform the Eurozone. Historically Britain lagged the EZ in growth cycles before the recession. Currently it’s in the process of catching up after the disasters of 2008.

All the evidence for the economy to grow is to the contrary if Britain leaves. If it stays Britain can contribute in a trading partnership to help the Eurozone recovery. In fact the latest data shows the EZ is starting to slowly recover. Greece is a separate issue I accept that but are you seeing mass migration to Britain by Greeks?

Germany is against QE because of historical problems with the Weimar Republic before 1933 when they printed huge sums to keep their economy going and the Mark became worthless as a result. It destroyed asset class investment and savings. The Germans or at least some German economists believe the EZ is in the same danger. It's actually not the case for so many reasons but these academics don't see the need for risk.

Michael Bloomberg is just one of many well respected politicians who are against Brexit. I believe we should give their knowledge and experience some credit instead of cynically dismissing what they say. Why does the Brexit camp have only some very dubious politicians in terms of credibility and few really credible world statesmen supporting them?

Conclusion; Brexit is wrong and bad for Britain.  

 Why does the Brexit camp have only some very dubious politicians in terms of credibility and few really credible world statesmen supporting them?

Thats quite good considering the very dubious ways our current "Don't leave"  leaders have exploited the UK people of late.

The main thing to remember about those who say we cant leave the EU because of all the forthcoming problems is pretty much like when our budget comes around and we get told of all the good things that are about to happen, it's what he wont tell us about that is the shocker, we find that out afterwards. 

Why do folk keep on about the immigrant workers from the EU, it's not so much them that is the problem, YET, it's the millions that come in from countries outside of the EU that are causing many problems? And the way the EU is letting others join up their wont be that many left on the outside soon anyway.

German acted unilaterally to allow Syrian refugees to settle in their country. It was nothing to do with the EU. In fact the EU has acted together recently to stop the flow of migration from the camps in Turkey. It seems to be working so far.

Britain (not the EU) has always accepted a quota of migrants from Asia and Africa. In fact all former residents of British colonies had an automatic right of a UK passport and residency in the UK at one time.

These are domestic political issues similar to Germany’s decision. Britain has the power to control its own boarders to stop illegal immigration. It is not part of the Schengen zone and the EU has no control over what the UK government decides to do about it.

Reading all your posts again baz you blame constantly the EU for Britain’s ills from your perspective. When in fact they are the result of UK domestic government policy over the years. Your beef is with the UK political system but you blame the EU for it. It’s slightly bizarre.

The UK governs itself. Only 60% of laws and collectively agreed with EU states. Britain retains its sovereignty and political power at Westminster. This entire referendum call was a sovereign decision, not an EU one.

Yes I do blame the UK government for everything, because no one knows how much the EU tells the UK government what to do, unless of course like I got told when I questioned a Vosa inspector over a new rubbish MOT law which I know they, the UK, introduced..Quote   "Nothing to do with us, you can blame the EU for that one", so I took him to task about what he said.

The EU has now brought in a new size packet of ciggys, has to be 20 in a pack only, believe it starts tomorrow,  to make room for the new advertising laws about the dangers of smoking, so the person that bought ten and they lasted a week now has to buy twenty and hope they can save ten for next week and not smoke all twenty in one week. Menthol cigs are to be banned (So I understand) smoking kills millions every year, but the ban for these don't start until 2020.

Anyone can read what they like about what the UK government can, or can't do, the reality of it is they can't unless the EU agree's it first, but like I say we don't get to hear about that bit. It's all Cameron said this, Cameron said that.

I think it's worth copying Michael Bloomberg's article on here. I admired him as NYC Mayor and he has an excellent insight in international business. It also gives some indication of how the US views Britain and it's place in the world.

Source Bloomberg.com.

The British electorate does not need Americans to tell them how to vote in the June 23 referendum, and I wouldn’t dare try. I have always had great admiration for the British people -- and great respect for the country’s democratic traditions. But from across the Atlantic, we Yanks are watching the campaign closely -- and many of us who have deep personal and business ties to the U.K. can’t help but take a close interest.

The special relationship between the U.K. and U.S. holds a special place in my heart, and not just because I had the great privilege of being named an honorary Knight of the British Empire by the Queen in 2014. I consider London my second home, my daughters hold British passports (thanks to their British mother), the company I founded employs nearly 4,000 people here, and we have long supported some of London’s world-class cultural institutions.

David Cameron and Boris Johnson, while on opposite sides of the debate, are both good friends and have assured me that no matter what the outcome of the vote, thanks to the Freedom of the City of London I was awarded in 2008, I will still have the right to herd sheep and cattle over London Bridge, and to carry a sword around Piccadilly Circus or anywhere else. Thank goodness for that!

Of course, there is so much more at stake in next month’s referendum, economically and politically -- first and foremost for the British people, but also for Americans and the world. I recognize that, as in most political campaigns, some of the rhetoric on both sides has been wildly exaggerated. But there is no disputing one fact: Given the uncertainty of Brexit’s potential impact, a vote to leave is a risk. The question is: Is the risk worth taking?

I should note: I’ve never been averse to taking risks. In 1981, I started a company to create a product that had no demand, with technology that didn’t exist. Twenty years later, I ran for mayor of New York when no one thought I had even the slightest chance of winning. Against the odds, both decisions turned out better than I could have ever dreamed of. But over the course of my career, there are certain risks that I have refused to take (including running for U.S. president this year) after weighing the evidence and concluding that they were likely to produce more harm than good. Some risks are just not worth it.

As the founder of a business that specializes in financial data, news and analysis, I have carefully evaluated the question of Brexit and concluded that the risks involved are troubling. No one can say for certain if an “Out” vote would shrink the financial services industry, which accounts for about 12 percent of the U.K.’s economic output and the bulk of our customer base. But in my conversations with chief executives of banks and other industry leaders, with rare exceptions, they see Brexit as a serious complication that could lead some jobs to shift to the continent over time. Some in Frankfurt and Paris are rooting for Brexit for this reason.

Bloomberg is building a new European headquarters in London. Whatever the outcome of the vote, we are committed to the U.K. But if some of our clients move operations across the channel -- and there is a good chance that some foreign exchange and derivative trading will migrate overseas -- we may need to move more resources and personnel there, too. In addition, as the competition for talent intensifies, restrictions on free movement could force us to divert resources to other global technology centers, leaving fewer job opportunities for skilled British workers.

I also worry that Brexit will leave our U.K. employees worse off. No one knows for certain how the U.K. would fare in trade negotiations with the European Union, but we know Brussels would hold substantial leverage, given that the U.K. is far more dependent on the EU for exports than the EU is dependent on the U.K. What price EU leaders would exact is impossible to predict, but deterring other countries from breaking away -- not to mention the opportunity to punish an old rival -- is likely to discourage them from looking sympathetically upon Britain. Even if fair terms are secured, achieving them may take years, and families may feel a pinch well into the next decade.

Those are risks that, as an entrepreneur who has invested heavily in the U.K., I find unsettling. And as an American who has served in public office and seen the importance of international cooperation, the prospect of the U.K. leaving the EU is even more worrisome.

At a time when liberal democracies are threatened by anti-Western terrorists, it is critical that we closely coordinate on security policies and intelligence. In the aftermath of multiple terrorist attacks, British leadership on counterterrorism and intelligence is all the more crucial. Yet leaving the EU would diminish the U.K.’s ability to lead on security matters. Strategically, having the U.K. in the EU is a vitally important asset for the U.S. The U.K. and U.S. will always have a special relationship, but Brexit would leave the U.K., America and the rest of the world in a weaker position to combat terrorism, promote trade, and confront other global challenges including climate change.

In the face of foreign threats and domestic economic struggles, it is inevitable that some will call for a retreat from international affairs. In the States, retreat from cross-border trade has unfortunately been a theme of candidates in both parties. One in particular, Donald Trump, has gone further, by scapegoating our foreign neighbors and competitors. Recently Trump has said that if he were casting a ballot on June 23, he would vote to leave.

I’m not advising the British electorate how to vote. But for centuries the British people and the world have benefited enormously from a confident, forward-looking and outward-facing U.K. -- and based on my desire to see the U.K. and U.S. both grow stronger in the years to come, I’m hoping that tradition continues.

I’m not advising the British electorate how to vote. But for centuries the British people and the world have benefited enormously from a confident, forward-looking and outward-facing U.K.

And we could again, but only if we take the opportunity to secure our freedom on the 23 June.

I agree tteedd, that last paragraph sounded like 'vote leave' to me to!!

'Outward-facing UK', meaning towards Europe and the rest of the world. Not inwardly navel gazing at the past.

You outer folks are clutching at straws in the wind.