Steve
Hero Protagonist
Posts: 3,365
|
Post by Steve on Jul 19, 2024 8:32:32 GMT
It's not real money unless it has the monarch's head on it. God save the King. Perhaps we could make that a condition of us re-joining.  Noooooooooooooo. We see enough of jug ears already. An EU acccession treaty could esily give us a waiver out of all sorts of things including the Euro but it isn't going to happen any time soon. |
|
|
|
Post by vinny on Jul 19, 2024 8:37:30 GMT
Except it isn't, because recession is exacerbated by industrial decline.
When we were members of the EU, rampant industrial decline took place, even HP Sauce production in the UK stopped and was replaced by import.
For the EU to work it needs a level playing field, same taxes, same wage standards, right across the EU.
And that would make it into a country.
That requires a democratically elected executive.
|
|
Steve
Hero Protagonist
Posts: 3,365
|
Post by Steve on Jul 19, 2024 8:39:58 GMT
Our rampant industrial decline is due to 70 years of government after government not having a manufacturing strategy and only ever acting short term.
But again you'll blame everything on the EU from a man farting in a lift in Frankfurt to the BBC not showing your favourite programmes.
|
|
|
|
Post by Saint on Jul 19, 2024 9:24:03 GMT
The EU is mostly concerned with standardising laws to facilitate trade. The question is: what laws in any particular area should be the standard law throughout the EU? Most EU member states will already have their own particular laws in particular areas. Trademark laws are an example. These were different in the different member states before standardisation. The thing is, nobody likes change. While everyone recognises that standardisation is necessary to the common economic good, every member state would rather that the laws that it already has became the standard throughout Europe. So, let's say that the law of contract is about to be standardised. Everyone recognises that will be a good thing, economically speaking. But EVERY SINGLE member state will hope that the new standardised law will be the same as the laws they already have or very close to it. That would cause the least disruption to business in that member state. At the moment, the Commission consults every member state and tries to come up with a compromise law of contract, etc. When the EU becomes more 'democratic', the laws that will be introduced will be those that suit the countries with the biggest voting share in the EU Parliament. The days of tireless Commission efforts to secure a compromise that suits everyone will be gone. The Commission has a world-wide reputation for writing solid workable laws. When the EU becomes 'democratic', the laws will become those that favour the biggest nations and cause them the least disruption. That's when the smaller nations will start leaving. One of the things I asked multiple times during the Brexit debate was, 'can you tell me a single EU law that effected you personally in the UK' No one could really think of anything dramatic. Saint is correct, the EU was focussed on standardising things, especially those that moved from country to country. Things like the legal minimum depth of tyre treads or the weight of vehicles allowed on roads. Things like what grounds you needed for divorce or what you could buy in your shops were left to individual countries. Will that change when the EU becomes "democratic" (Not sure what's implied here) I don't think so, I think it will be more like the United States. Exactly! One of the biggest, if not the biggest, obstacle to trade and the wealth that accompanies trade, is different standards in different countries. The Commission's objective is to create a single standard in as many commercial areas as possible. Standardisation is the Commission's central remit. When Brexiters object to Brussels-made laws they are objecting to standardisation and the vast economic advantages that accompany standardisation. The really odd thing, as you say, is that it concerns itself with things that most people don't have very strong, or often any, opinions about, such as standardisation of tyre gauge, trademark laws, health warnings, etc. |
|
|
|
Post by andrewbrown on Jul 19, 2024 9:29:59 GMT
even HP Sauce production in the UK stopped and was replaced by import. That was a good thing. That horrible vinegary smell opposite the BRMB studios in Aston was rank. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 19, 2024 9:55:30 GMT
The EU is mostly concerned with standardising laws to facilitate trade. The question is: what laws in any particular area should be the standard law throughout the EU? Most EU member states will already have their own particular laws in particular areas. Trademark laws are an example. These were different in the different member states before standardisation. The thing is, nobody likes change. While everyone recognises that standardisation is necessary to the common economic good, every member state would rather that the laws that it already has became the standard throughout Europe. So, let's say that the law of contract is about to be standardised. Everyone recognises that will be a good thing, economically speaking. But EVERY SINGLE member state will hope that the new standardised law will be the same as the laws they already have or very close to it. That would cause the least disruption to business in that member state. At the moment, the Commission consults every member state and tries to come up with a compromise law of contract, etc. When the EU becomes more 'democratic', the laws that will be introduced will be those that suit the countries with the biggest voting share in the EU Parliament. The days of tireless Commission efforts to secure a compromise that suits everyone will be gone. The Commission has a world-wide reputation for writing solid workable laws. When the EU becomes 'democratic', the laws will become those that favour the biggest nations and cause them the least disruption. That's when the smaller nations will start leaving. One of the things I asked multiple times during the Brexit debate was, 'can you tell me a single EU law that effected you personally in the UK' No one could really think of anything dramatic. Saint is correct, the EU was focussed on standardising things, especially those that moved from country to country. Things like the legal minimum depth of tyre treads or the weight of vehicles allowed on roads. Things like what grounds you needed for divorce or what you could buy in your shops were left to individual countries. Will that change when the EU becomes "democratic" (Not sure what's implied here) I don't think so, I think it will be more like the United States. ^ There were insane EU laws that really did affect things dramatically for many, many good ones too, blanket saying there weren't any EU laws that didn't affect us dramatically is ridiculous frankly and reads as gibberish |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 19, 2024 9:57:15 GMT
If you're in a recession, cannot devalue your currency, cannot put up interest rates, cannot do anything about the recession you're in, you're screwed. The EU has a currency union, but not a fiscal union. Without a fiscal union it cannot work. And you would take us into that currency union, just because you're upset about Brexit (despite Brexit being a democratic and economic success). But your recession is also mitigated by being in a larger state. What happens in the United States when Montana goes into recession? And they also hold it back, it works both ways You'd rather see a dead queen on the currency instead? How morbid His currency union point was good. This also reads as gibberish. Face facts: our "pro EU" governments did as much for the decline of manufacturing as so called Brexiter ones Close down all manufacturing because it slightly inconveniences us, brown A lot of the pro EU stuff here is pretty silly Anyway and however, I agree a lot of the silly Brexiter ranting about how bad the EU is even sillier and utterly ridiculous ...... |
|
|
|
Post by vinny on Jul 19, 2024 9:57:50 GMT
If you're in a recession, cannot devalue your currency, cannot put up interest rates, cannot do anything about the recession you're in, you're screwed. The EU has a currency union, but not a fiscal union. Without a fiscal union it cannot work. And you would take us into that currency union, just because you're upset about Brexit (despite Brexit being a democratic and economic success). Yes it can work without a fiscal union. The EU has already proven that it does not. |
|
|
|
Post by vinny on Jul 19, 2024 10:03:32 GMT
even HP Sauce production in the UK stopped and was replaced by import. That was a good thing. That horrible vinegary smell opposite the BRMB studios in Aston was rank. Heathen. 125 people lost their jobs there alone. Car production jobs lost to the EU were in the thousands. All because of a lack of level playing field on wages and taxes and it being cheaper to import than make. Being in the EU was really bad for us. |
|
|
|
Post by Saint on Jul 19, 2024 10:14:21 GMT
That was a good thing. That horrible vinegary smell opposite the BRMB studios in Aston was rank. All because of a lack of level playing field on wages and taxes and it being cheaper to import than make. What's really interesting is your preference for deepening economic ties with the Commonwealth, where the playing field is cut across by a sheer fall. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 19, 2024 10:15:33 GMT
Yes it can work without a fiscal union. The EU has already proven that it does not. Define "work" Preventing world war is its no 1 purpose and to that end it works perfectly The silly posts here frankly aren't doing a good job of defending the EU properly, but to boil it down to the most basic of basics: preventing war between Euro countries has to be the most important thing and that works. That's why I don't want to see it dissolve |
|
|
|
Post by Saint on Jul 19, 2024 10:21:10 GMT
One of the things I asked multiple times during the Brexit debate was, 'can you tell me a single EU law that effected you personally in the UK' No one could really think of anything dramatic. Saint is correct, the EU was focussed on standardising things, especially those that moved from country to country. Things like the legal minimum depth of tyre treads or the weight of vehicles allowed on roads. Things like what grounds you needed for divorce or what you could buy in your shops were left to individual countries. Will that change when the EU becomes "democratic" (Not sure what's implied here) I don't think so, I think it will be more like the United States. , many good ones too, blanket saying there weren't any EU laws that didn't affect us dramatically is ridiculous frankly and reads as gibberish What do you have in mind? |
|
|
|
Post by Saint on Jul 19, 2024 10:23:26 GMT
The EU has already proven that it does not. Define "work" Preventing world war is its no 1 purpose and to that end it works perfectly The silly posts here frankly aren't doing a good job of defending the EU properly, but to boil it down to the most basic of basics: preventing war between Euro countries has to be the most important thing and that works. That's why I don't want to see it dissolve That misses the point. You can't talk about preventing war without mentioning the economic advantages because the EU seeks to prevent war by increasing economic ties. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 19, 2024 10:29:20 GMT
^ There were insane EU laws that really did affect things dramatically for many, many good ones too, blanket saying there weren't any EU laws that didn't affect us dramatically is ridiculous frankly and reads as gibberish What do you have in mind? For example the native-foreign worker pay parity act which forced native workers to be paid the same as foreign posted workers. It's called the posted workers directive I believe. It had a dramatic effect on pay levels, it was a good thing but you can't tell me it wasn't a dramatic effect it had on any country that adopted it. I don't agree with the over the top arguments that the EU had no effect on us and we could do what we like, it definitely didn't work like that. That's the reverse argument that Brexiters make that the EU had every effect on us and we couldn't decide anything. Both extremes are incorrect. |
|
|
|
Post by brownlow on Jul 19, 2024 10:29:41 GMT
If you're in a recession, cannot devalue your currency, cannot put up interest rates, cannot do anything about the recession you're in, you're screwed. The EU has a currency union, but not a fiscal union. Without a fiscal union it cannot work. And you would take us into that currency union, just because you're upset about Brexit (despite Brexit being a democratic and economic success). But your recession is also mitigated by being in a larger state. What happens in the United States when Montana goes into recession? The federal union ponies up without imposing austerity and privatisation on "lazy feckless" Montana. |
|
