[Merged] The Europe Thread

Originally Posted by towny

a base rate of 2% would fuel rampant house price inflation,

To take this single point, one of the primary reasons we run the risk of massive house price inflation is due to a severe shortage in certain areas of the country. If the government weren`t so twitchy about building on greenfield sites then this problem could be overcome. It is a little simplistic to latch onto a single factor such as interest rates when there are other factors that could be manipulated to counter their effects.

Originally Posted by iadom

But we don't get back anything like the amount we contribute, even allowing for Maggie Thatchers claw back deals. And the Independent is totally biased in favour of Europe so to quote Mandy Rice Davies ( or was it Christine Keeler ) "they would say that, wouldn't they"

Like i said the money aspect was also in a bbc feature a few months ago (may have been newnight but was not bbc news) and also in the times around the time of the discussion about letting turkey into the eu

Also people have said to stop quoting other people and news items but I like you lot have to get my information from somewhere and if you automatically dismiss every source then this discussion is pointless

My position is that what we have now is good and should be kept, also I would like to one day have the euro i go to france and back a lot and like the convenience of a single currency it also makes things simpler. Also easyer travel between member states and a bit more intergration in terms of transport and communcations

[SMHarman]

Originally Posted by towny

It aint rocket science - the â‚ ¬ exists because it suits the grand political aspirations of those who believe in 'The Project'. It is economically indefensible, and those who purport to make economic defences of it merely do so either to hide the true political motives of it, or have been hoodwinked by others who do so.

So how come the â‚ ¬ cannot work and is a political project, yet the $ does work and serves states as diverse as the technology and wine state of California, banking in New York, tourism in Florida, Agriculture in the bread belt, all with differing average incomes etc. All sharing a common interest rate set by the fed.

The only reason I can see that the â‚ ¬ would not work and the $ would be that there is not a federal tax and redistribution system so the poorer countries / states get funding from the wealthier, but there is. We contribute (according to other posters) £20Bn / yr, which is then used for redistribution to poorer parts of the EU, Greek islands, southern italy etc.

Maybe I'm being but, the â‚ ¬ is working a heck of a lot better than the pundits predicted in '99 and in another 5 years time will have settled in nicely.

Originally Posted by dr wadd

To take this single point, one of the primary reasons we run the risk of massive house price inflation is due to a severe shortage in certain areas of the country. If the government weren`t so twitchy about building on greenfield sites then this problem could be overcome. It is a little simplistic to latch onto a single factor such as interest rates when there are other factors that could be manipulated to counter their effects.

That's the point, though, it is just a single point (if you see what I mean). The case for currency integration doesn't stand or fall on that one argument, and in fact that one argument doesn't fall on the basis of the point you make about the Government's ludicrous housing development policy - as I said, Germany's recession is a good example of the opposite danger of setting a single interest rate for the whole EU.

[Theodoric]

Originally Posted by towny

<Snip>
This is the third Europe thread in as many weeks and each one winds up discussing the same general issues, regardless of the initial question. I want to talk about it but it's getting confusing!!!!

Very true. My intention in the thread was not to attack the EU which, as you say, has to be done ad nauseam recently, but to ask the very specific question; if we walked out of the EU tomorrow, how would we survive in the world? Would we try to follow Norway's example, a much smaller country, and go it alone? Would we apply for entry to Nafta and become a total client state of the USA or would we go the whole hog, as has been seriously suggested in the past, and become the 51st state?

[deadite66]

we give money to the EU -> they give it to poorer countries -> economy of
those countries improve -> our jobs goes to those countries = well done.

also Britain is pretty much the only country to follow all the rules, you can
still buy fruit and veg in Brussels in pounds and ounces ffs.
France and Germany can't even stick to their own tax laws they demanded
the EU adopt.

[Xaccers]

Originally Posted by Damien

My position is that what we have now is good and should be kept, also I would like to one day have the euro i go to france and back a lot and like the convenience of a single currency it also makes things simpler. Also easyer travel between member states and a bit more intergration in terms of transport and communcations

What we have now is good???? Have you been living in a cave?
Is this the same EU that employed someone to root out corruption and when she did they sacked her?

As for the euro, ease of currency abroad is an awful reason to adopt a financial project which has caused so many countries so much trouble.
Why do you think our economy is in such a better state than other european economies?
Why do you think Germany and Portugal are having to break Euro rules?
You yourself state that we lose £20bill ion to Europe, that's £20bill ion this country needs!

[downquark1]

Originally Posted by Xaccers

What we have now is good???? Have you been living in a cave?
Is this the same EU that employed someone to root out corruption and when she did they sacked her?

We should stick it out and try and fix the corruption and mis-management, not batten down the hatches and run away. IMO

[Tezcatlipoca]

Originally Posted by towny

and could somebody pleeeeease merge this thread into that ongoing Europe thread:

http://www.cableforum.co.uk/board/sh...ad.php?t=13531

This is the third Europe thread in as many weeks and each one winds up discussing the same general issues, regardless of the initial question. I want to talk about it but it's getting confusing!!!!

Good point....threads merged (a bit belatedly, I admit)

Originally Posted by Xaccers

What we have now is good???? Have you been living in a cave?
Is this the same EU that employed someone to root out corruption and when she did they sacked her?

As for the euro, ease of currency abroad is an awful reason to adopt a financial project which has caused so many countries so much trouble.
Why do you think our economy is in such a better state than other european economies?
Why do you think Germany and Portugal are having to break Euro rules?
You yourself state that we lose £20bill ion to Europe, that's £20bill ion this country needs!

I said that we lose £20bill ion if we leave europe not losing to europe and you ask yourself if we would still have such a good econmany without being in the EU

Also we do break euro rules a recent one about human rights for example

[Shaun]

Originally Posted by towny

The most tiresome thing about post-election inquests is how everybody who has done badly is so keen to talk instead about how everybody else has done even worse.

Did you see Question Time yesterday? That guy from UKIP was so annoying. He i guess is the exception that proves the rule as he spent loads of time putting the other party's down, by saying where he got his party's votes from and slating the lib dems for being joint third in the Euro elections. What a nincompoop

Originally Posted by dellwear

Did you see Question Time yesterday? That guy from UKIP was so annoying. He i guess is the exception that proves the rule as he spent loads of time putting the other party's down, by saying where he got his party's votes from and slating the lib dems for being joint third in the Euro elections. What a nincompoop

No, I missed that unfortunately. I can see how that would have been annoying, but then if I had just helped execute one of the biggest electoral upsets in modern times I think I might be a little smug too

[Xaccers]

Originally Posted by Damien

I said that we lose £20bill ion if we leave europe not losing to europe and you ask yourself if we would still have such a good econmany without being in the EU

I didn't say pull out, personally I want to go back to the common market which gives us those trading partners.
That does not require a single currenct, especially one which is damaging so many of the economies that use it.
Not having to change money when going abroad is a pathetic reason to adopt it.

Originally Posted by Damien

Also we do break euro rules a recent one about human rights for example

What's that got to do with the Euro and it's poor economic functionality forcing goverments to either go outside the economic process of the Euro, or bankrupt their countries. How the hell can someone say that's a good thing?

[iadom]

Originally Posted by dellwear

Did you see Question Time yesterday? That guy from UKIP was so annoying. He i guess is the exception that proves the rule as he spent loads of time putting the other party's down, by saying where he got his party's votes from and slating the lib dems for being joint third in the Euro elections. What a nincompoop

I watched a little of last nights programme and although I am firmly in the "Common Market" YES, complete political and financial integration NO camp, I was a little worried by this mans background. I know that it is quite common for foreigners to be involved in British politics but this guy was a bit to close to the top in the USA and I wonder about his motives and wether or not he has a hidden agenda, I don't think the Americans are over keen on a strong Europe.

An article by this fellow, Dick Morris,
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au...5E7583,00.html

[downquark1]

Anyone got a link to a summary of the final constitution?