|
Post by derrida1437 on Aug 18, 2015 11:56:48 GMT
I don't see why free trade means you have to have fixed exchange rates or common tax regimes. All you need is the removal of tariffs. You don't even need freedom of movement; goods is enough. On the other hand, if you want political union all of those things and more are required. The point is this - closer integration is driven by political not economic factors. We're constantly beng sold a pig in a poke by folk trying to use economic arguments for what is primarily a political ambition. This is basically why the fiasco in Greece exists. Europe desperately needs recallibrating; more economics and less politics. Closer integration is driven by both political and economic factors. The argument is that the one thing European integration should be driven by are social factors, and it's these that get forgotten about a lot of the time. Citing Greece as an example, the question isn't "why is Greece struggling to stay in the Euro?", it's "why did Greece want to join the currency union in the first place?". With this in mind it's clear that economic and political factors are the defining characteristics of European integration.
|
|
|
Post by RichieBarkerOut! on Aug 18, 2015 12:00:01 GMT
The difference is that there is a very real will, within the governance of the EU, for ever closer union, and this was not what we voted for in the Common Market Referendum. I do not know how many I speak for, but when I call for us to leave the EU, I do not wish us to roll back our membership of the Common Market, if it all comes as a package, then fine, and I'll put my faith in the WTA to ensure that the EU don't shaft us in spite, should we leave completely. I understand your view. The only thing we can say with any degree of certainty is that the UK will have to pay trade tariffs with the EU as it will no longer be paying to be part of the EU group. It does appear to come as one package. The closest example we have is Norway and even that isn't the same as the UK scenario being painted. I can't see what the WTA can do if the UK chooses to leave. It's sensible, if you to want to leave a group that has membership benefits, to expect negative consequences from it in the shape of the withdrawal of those benefits. The EU would dictate what the terms are; the UK would either take them or leave them. My WTA comment is based around it being an arbitrator for "fair trade". I see more economic pitfalls than positive ones, but I wish to live in a country where it's laws and decisions are made by the representatives of it's people, for the benefit of it's people, rather than for the benefit of an undemocratic European elite.
|
|
|
Post by partickpotter on Aug 18, 2015 12:30:34 GMT
I don't see why free trade means you have to have fixed exchange rates or common tax regimes. All you need is the removal of tariffs. You don't even need freedom of movement; goods is enough. On the other hand, if you want political union all of those things and more are required. The point is this - closer integration is driven by political not economic factors. We're constantly beng sold a pig in a poke by folk trying to use economic arguments for what is primarily a political ambition. This is basically why the fiasco in Greece exists. Europe desperately needs recallibrating; more economics and less politics. Closer integration is driven by both political and economic factors. The argument is that the one thing integration should be driven by is social factors, and it's these that get forgotten about a lot of the time. Citing Greece as an example, the question isn't "why is Greece struggling to stay in the Euro?", it's "why did Greece want to join the currency union in the first place?". With this in mind it's clear that economic and political factors are the defining characteristics of European integration. Let's agree to differ. In my opinion politics is driving integration far more than economics. Indeed, if there is a conflict between economics and politics, the politics wins, as in the case of Greece joining the Euro.
|
|
|
Post by RichieBarkerOut! on Aug 18, 2015 12:47:21 GMT
I don't see why free trade means you have to have fixed exchange rates or common tax regimes. All you need is the removal of tariffs. You don't even need freedom of movement; goods is enough. On the other hand, if you want political union all of those things and more are required. The point is this - closer integration is driven by political not economic factors. We're constantly beng sold a pig in a poke by folk trying to use economic arguments for what is primarily a political ambition. This is basically why the fiasco in Greece exists. Europe desperately needs recallibrating; more economics and less politics. Closer integration is driven by both political and economic factors. The argument is that the one thing integration should be driven by is social factors, and it's these that get forgotten about a lot of the time. Citing Greece as an example, the question isn't "why is Greece struggling to stay in the Euro?", it's "why did Greece want to join the currency union in the first place?". With this in mind it's clear that economic and political factors are the defining characteristics of European integration. The Greek people were promised (and got) huge investment in infrastructure and at long last, financial prudence. The Greek politicians in power, cooked the books (just like they've always done) and took back handers off the German companies that completed the huge infrastructure works. Ultimately, the Greek politicians got what they wanted, German infrastructure companies got what they wanted, and the Greek people got shafted.
|
|
|
Post by derrida1437 on Sept 2, 2015 6:46:18 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 2, 2015 11:36:55 GMT
"Free and fair"
Asfuckinif
I'll believe it when I see it
|
|
|
Post by Skankmonkey on Sept 2, 2015 13:25:47 GMT
"Free and fair" Asfuckinif I'll believe it when I see it Always a good idea to prepare your excuses for failure early on. Well done.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 2, 2015 14:14:00 GMT
"Free and fair" Asfuckinif I'll believe it when I see it Always a good idea to prepare your excuses for failure early on. Well done. How am I going to fail egg head?
|
|
|
Post by starkiller on Sept 2, 2015 14:29:10 GMT
Once again, 'fear' will win the day and people will vote to stay in the EU.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 2, 2015 14:35:33 GMT
I smell a rat with the treatment of the poor buggers in the news at the moment EU keep referring to UK attitude
I expect this kind of thing escalating as the referendum gets closer
|
|
|
Post by Skankmonkey on Sept 3, 2015 10:26:53 GMT
Always a good idea to prepare your excuses for failure early on. Well done. How am I going to fail egg head? You already have son.
In this instance I was referring to UKIP's prospects in the EU referendum.
|
|
|
Post by desman2 on Sept 3, 2015 10:28:33 GMT
How am I going to fail egg head? You already have son.
In this instance I was referring to UKIP's prospects in the EU referendum.
Are UKIP standing in the EU referendum. Whos our candidate in Stoke.
|
|
|
Post by Skankmonkey on Sept 3, 2015 10:32:16 GMT
You already have son.
In this instance I was referring to UKIP's prospects in the EU referendum.
Are UKIP standing in the EU referendum. Whos our candidate in Stoke. I'm guessing you might just be the pick of their choices. If we are both going to pretend to misunderstand my meaning that is.
|
|
|
Post by desman2 on Sept 3, 2015 10:33:05 GMT
Whethert we stay in or out, if this migrant problem continues as it is then the people of Europe as a whole will destroy the EU themselves.
|
|
|
Post by derrida1437 on Sept 7, 2015 23:02:17 GMT
"Government Suffers 'Humiliating' Defeat By Its Own MPs in EU Referendum Vote" Time for Cameron's party to implode? This government defeat over the EU referendum bill is the quickest defeat of any government since 1945. t.co/BcviA2BQ0F
|
|
|
Post by desman2 on Sept 7, 2015 23:09:20 GMT
Ive ordered my tickets for the tillington hall out event. Will be good to see whats going on.
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Sept 15, 2015 12:10:40 GMT
It will be interesting to see the effect of the TUC coming out in favour of an EU exit, which seems likely.They seem to have a grip on how the experiment will affect ordinary workers, and are prepared to say so.
|
|
|
Post by derrida1437 on Sept 16, 2015 15:59:07 GMT
It's worth considering, when you count up how many votes pro EU parties get and compare it to those of anti-EU parties, the majority of the electorate want to stay in the EU.
Whether Jeremy Corbyn likes it or not Labour is an internationalist party. It's common knowledge that if he tries to get Labour to adopt an anti-EU platform the party wil implode. Literally. Tory style.
|
|
|
Post by derrida1437 on Sept 16, 2015 16:20:39 GMT
Just to clarify the union position: "The GMB union has submitted a motion to the Labour conference saying the party should not support staying in the European Union if employment rights are watered down as part of any membership renegotiations. The motion says: Conference furthermore confirms that the Labour Party will resist any attempts by the Government to scale back the application of EU employment and social rights to British workers in this process, and that if EU Member State governments allow Cameron to remove these rights, then the Labour Party should not support a vote to remain in the EU." gu.com/p/4ce2v?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other
|
|
|
Post by desman2 on Sept 16, 2015 16:42:45 GMT
It's worth considering, when you count up how many votes pro EU parties get and compare it to those of anti-EU parties, the majority of the electorate want to stay in the EU. Whether Jeremy Corbyn likes it or not Labour is an internationalist party. It's common knowledge that if he tries to get Labour to adopt an anti-EU platform the party wil implode. Literally. Tory style. Thats not really a good pointer though is it. People will vote for the alleged pro parties who will not neccersarily want to stay in. Most voters dont vote in our elections based on EU membership but if they have then current events in Europe and the possibility of it ending up here might swing them.
|
|
|
Post by derrida1437 on Sept 16, 2015 17:19:02 GMT
It's worth considering, when you count up how many votes pro EU parties get and compare it to those of anti-EU parties, the majority of the electorate want to stay in the EU. Whether Jeremy Corbyn likes it or not Labour is an internationalist party. It's common knowledge that if he tries to get Labour to adopt an anti-EU platform the party wil implode. Literally. Tory style. Thats not really a good pointer though is it. People will vote for the alleged pro parties who will not neccersarily want to stay in. Most voters dont vote in our elections based on EU membership but if they have then current events in Europe and the possibility of it ending up here might swing them. I agree but it's the closest pointer we have. By comparison to elections, pollsters...well we know how inaccurate pollsters are. An election is the most accurate poll you can take.
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Sept 16, 2015 18:16:56 GMT
It's worth considering, when you count up how many votes pro EU parties get and compare it to those of anti-EU parties, the majority of the electorate want to stay in the EU. Whether Jeremy Corbyn likes it or not Labour is an internationalist party. It's common knowledge that if he tries to get Labour to adopt an anti-EU platform the party wil implode. Literally. Tory style. Derrida It's quite obvious that we now exist in a global world.we, the UK, clearly must have and will have international relationships and agreements.It's not about that. It's about democracy and having the belief , confidence and ability to create the alliances and relationships ourselves. If you have bought into the construct and experiment that the only way to do this is the EU experiment , that is your decision. The Labour party may well explode if Corbyn is true to his own Bennite beliefs, and as the Morning Star has consistently argued this is the true Socialist stance. If the Party had stuck to its anti EU policy, (the ticket on which Jeremy was elected to Parliament ) they may well be in power now and there would be no need for UKIP. It will all depend upon whether Corbyn decides that this is one issue on which he is prepared to compromise. ...a massive decision of which he is aware. If he opts to support Brexit there will be turmoil , and it will depend upon how convincingly he makes the argument. Perversely I am not sure that Corbyn's support will help the Brexit campaign.
|
|
|
Post by derrida1437 on Sept 16, 2015 20:11:48 GMT
It's worth considering, when you count up how many votes pro EU parties get and compare it to those of anti-EU parties, the majority of the electorate want to stay in the EU. Whether Jeremy Corbyn likes it or not Labour is an internationalist party. It's common knowledge that if he tries to get Labour to adopt an anti-EU platform the party wil implode. Literally. Tory style. Derrida It's quite obvious that we now exist in a global world.we, the UK, clearly must have and will have international relationships and agreements.It's not about that. It's about democracy and having the belief , confidence and ability to create the alliances and relationships ourselves. If you have bought into the construct and experiment that the only way to do this is the EU experiment , that is your decision. The Labour party may well explode if Corbyn is true to his own Bennite beliefs, and as the Morning Star has consistently argued this is the true Socialist stance. If the Party had stuck to its anti EU policy, (the ticket on which Jeremy was elected to Parliament ) they may well be in power now and there would be no need for UKIP. It will all depend upon whether Corbyn decides that this is one issue on which he is prepared to compromise. ...a massive decision of which he is aware. If he opts to support Brexit there will be turmoil , and it will depend upon how convincingly he makes the argument. Perversely I am not sure that Corbyn's support will help the Brexit campaign. Given what you say, and it's an altogether decent analysis, you have to ask yourself why Labour changed its anti-EU stance and embraced the concept of closer European Integration. There is a reason the Labour Party changed. There are two things Corbyn will find it nigh on impossible to change about the Labour Party without at the very least probably losing his job; one is NATO withdrawal; the other EU withdrawal. Some in my CLP hate Trident and I know there's a willingness to at least review it having read most of the party blogs. I appreciate the European Union is but one facet of the globalised economic construct. However only in the UK is the EU treated in complete isolation from the rest of the globalised multilateral framework. The EU is part of a greater multilateral framework, working in conjunction with the US, UN, NATO and the other regional economic areas. Everyone knows the EU needs reform. I know I've said this before but if you believe in multilateralism, cooperation, and internationalism which the Labour Movement espouses the idea of EU withdrawal is going to kick up an almighty storm. Then there's NATO.......!
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Sept 16, 2015 20:39:50 GMT
Derrida It's quite obvious that we now exist in a global world. We, the UK, clearly must have and will have international relationships and agreements.It's not about that. It's about democracy and having the belief , confidence and ability to create the alliances and relationships ourselves. If you have bought into the construct and experiment that the only way to do this is the EU experiment , that is your decision. The Labour party may well implode if Corbyn is true to his own Bennite beliefs, and as the Morning Star has consistently argued this is the true Socialist stance. If the Party had stuck to its anti EU policy, (the ticket on which Jeremy was elected to Parliament ) they may well be in power now and there would be no need for UKIP. It will all depend upon whether Corbyn decides that this is one issue on which he is prepared to compromise. ...a massive decision of which he is aware. If he opts to support Brexit there will be turmoil , and it will depend upon how convincingly he makes the argument. Perversely I am not sure that Corbyn's support will help the Brexit campaign. Given what you say, and it's an altogether decent analysis, you have to ask yourself why Labour changed its anti-EU stance and embraced the concept of closer European Integration. There is a reason the Labour Party changed. There are two things Corbyn will find it nigh on impossible to change about the Labour Party without at the very least probably losing his job; one is NATO withdrawal; the other EU withdrawal. Some in my CLP hate Trident and I know there's a willingness to at least review it having read most of the party blogs. I appreciate the European Union is but one facet of the globalised economic construct. However only in the UK is the EU treated in complete isolation from the rest of the globalised multilateral framework. The EU is part of a greater multilateral framework, working in conjunction with the US, UN, NATO and the other regional economic areas. Everyone knows the EU needs reform. I know I've said this before but if you believe in multilateralism, cooperation, and internationalism which the Labour Movement espouses the idea of EU withdrawal is going to kick up an almighty storm. Then there's NATO.......! I know what you mean Derrida, and it will be very difficult for the UK to leave. Personally I think we should ..... for many reasons which have been and will be revisited up to the referendum. For me democracy trumps all, then border control. The implications on the EU itself with our withdrawal would be immense. ...it would be severely restricted without our contribution. It is an experiment "in progress" ...eventually the power will be with Germany and France through the Eurozone, which eventually we will be required to join or will be excuded from the big boys club in any case. I was at the EU parliament again last week, I dont know if you have seen it but the sheer cost, complexity and infrastructure is scandalous given the simple problems we have at home , which ordinary people understand. ..NHS, education, Policing,border control ,immigration /integration issues (from all sides ), transport infratructure, a future for young people , social support (particularly looking after the elderly, as you have alluded to before) The EU is a self serving, constructed, talking shop , which gives a livelihood and pension to elite MPS and "talkers".It is very hard not to be part of the group, particularly when you are part of it and want to separate and go alone. They have managed to convince many that it is indespensible. It isn't.
|
|
|
Post by The Drunken Communist on Sept 16, 2015 20:47:50 GMT
Are we really going to get this In/Out EU vote? Or will it just get pushed back & pushed back untill the next Government? Or if it does, by some miracle, actually go ahead, it'll end up with some bollocks options?
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Sept 16, 2015 21:04:03 GMT
Are we really going to get this In/Out EU vote? Or will it just get pushed back & pushed back untill the next Government? Or if it does, by some miracle, actually go ahead, it'll end up with some bollocks options? I think that we will get it DC, whether it actually legally means that we HAVE to leave in the case of an OUT vote , I don't know ....do you ? Is it binding? As an aside it seems that Jeremy has decided to support staying in.
|
|
|
Post by The Drunken Communist on Sept 16, 2015 21:08:00 GMT
I think that we will get it DC, whether it actually legally means that we HAVE to leave in the case of an OUT vote , I don't know ....do you ? Is it binding? As an aside it seems that Jeremy has decided to support staying in. Absolutely no idea, mate. Knowing our dodgy fuck Government it'll all be a load of shit.
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Sept 17, 2015 4:55:59 GMT
It's standard integration theory. You can't assume, from your example, that every EU member state wants to be part of Germany because they don't. It means that if, as with NAFTA, you have a free trade area you physically need to come to an accommodation over exchange rates and taxation so that it is free. If you start negotiations over trade tariffs and exchange rates, you then need to discuss which currency you're going to fix exchange rates to. Some countries may then wish to negotiate which currency they want to trade in. Those countries will then need to closely integrate economic policies. It doesn't mean that political unification will happen. It explains how it could. I don't see why free trade means you have to have fixed exchange rates or common tax regimes. All you need is the removal of tariffs. You don't even need freedom of movement; goods is enough. On the other hand, if you want political union all of those things and more are required. The point is this - closer integration is driven by political not economic factors. We're constantly beng sold a pig in a poke by folk trying to use economic arguments for what is primarily a political ambition. This is basically why the fiasco in Greece exists. Europe desperately needs recallibrating; more economics and less politics. Patrick With reference to your last sentence this is indeed the intention of the 'EU', the Roadmap plans a recalibration (see below).It is clear to me that ever closer union though will be as much political as economic ( eg there are plans for a European army and the implications of the arrest warrant , just two examples). I believe that it is inevitable that the Eurozone will be the true ,tight first class EU. Control of the currency/economic policy is a/the major element of a sovereign country (a msjor issue in the Scottish referendum as an indicator of indrpendence!).Eventually we (the UK) may find ourselves competing with the Eurozone countries with their financial centre of Frankfurt OR we may be "required" to Join the Eurozone if we truly want to 'stay in the EU'.We will need some astute politicians in the next few years. ( apologies if I have not explained this very well). Democracy – The End Of An Experiment posted by Morning Star in Features:- Mere people cannot be allowed to stand in the way of the EU’s relentless drive to boost profits, writes STEVE McGIFFEN " The council, it’s true, does represent the member state governments, but under the system known as “European economic governance,” it is answerable to no-one, neither national parliaments nor a European Parliament which has the “power” only to discuss its decisions in the all-important area of economic policy. The report says that national parliaments for their part have to be “consulted” more systematically before the annual “national reform and stability programmes” are submitted. Add to this the new round of trade deals — of which the principal example is the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) — which threaten to lower standards across a range of policy areas including labour law, consumer law and environmental protection, and you can already see that any popular influence is being consigned to an ever-narrower policy range. Greece can only be understood as part of a much broader assault by a ruling elite which wants to see effective democracy consigned to the museum of 20th-century historical curiosities. It is a fight in which all of the gains of two centuries are under threat, and way beyond the shores of the Hellenic peninsula." www.morningstaronline.co.uk/a-0fd9-Democracy-the-end-of-an-experiment#.Vfo8eRBwbqB............................... From the roadmap for the future of economic and monetary union: They also advocate eventually establishing a euro area treasury to jointly take decisions about certain elements of national budgets. www.ecb.europa.eu/press/pr/date/2015/html/pr150622_3.en.html
|
|
|
Post by derrida1437 on Sept 17, 2015 7:00:16 GMT
|
|
|
Post by partickpotter on Sept 17, 2015 7:24:57 GMT
The TUC decision to back a No vote if Cameron achieves a watering down of workers rights is interesting. On the one hand it seems utterly counterproductive, but it makes sense if you consider the Union's somewhat reluctant love affair with the European ideal.
Back in the 70s the unions and far left were strongly anti-europe. After Thatcher was elected and it became apparent that 1) she was going to introduce legislation to curb Union power and 2) she was going to be in power for a long time, the Unions saw Europe as a vehicle to act against her so, ever pragmatic, they switched sides. Unlike our far leftie chums like Benn and Corbyn who maintained their idealistic stance against the rich mans' capitalist elite club that they perceive the EU to be.
So we're back to the early '80s again!
Not sure the GMB specifically and TUC generally have thought this threat through. A No vote will trigger another referendum in Scotland with a high chance that the vote will go for independence. In which case Labour face a future needing to secure a majority in what remains of the UK to get into power, which is very tough for them, meaning there is a strong chance of even more Tory Governments in future. And guess what - even more Union laws.
What's that expression, cutting your nose off to spite your face.
We seem to be entering a world of crazy politics.
|
|