Quote:
Originally Posted by nomadking
The US, China, India, etc have to obey EU product regulations to sell into the EU, so no change there.
If freedom of movement is such a central policy, why did it take a long time before it was introduced? It started as a freedom of movement of WORKERS, not benefit claimants. Were they always eligible for housing and non-contributory benefits or again is it a more recent thing?
How many UK originated policies have found there way to be EU directives and how many German originated polices have done so? That is how much say we have.
If we would lose billions in trade and millions of jobs, where would those billions and millions go to instead? Wouldn't the rest of the EU want us to leave as they would benefit from our alleged future losses?
|
A rhetorical question?...
Despite being a major economy and contributor we get very little bang for our buck. We can argue about why that is but it's a fact.
With French help the EU is largely run by Germans for the benefit of Germans rather like we ran our former empire. Germany is by far the biggest beneficiary of EU policy and the adoption of the Euro have only served to make German exports far more competitive than they would otherwise have been.
http://www.spiegel.de/international/...-a-808248.html
Anyway it's nice to feel that the EU would prefer to have us within - presumably that confirms they believe benefit significantly from our net 'contribution' to the whole rather than the other way around...