View Full Version : Should the UK remain in Europe
Following yesterday's vote in the Commons I thought I'd conduct my own very rough, straw-pole to see what everyone thinks as to whether the UK should remain a part of the European Union?
I think there are some intetesting times coming up for Europe so I'm just curious to see what everyone thinks.
florida4sun
25-10-2011, 10:35
Devil if we do, Devil if we don't. If we pull out, they close ranks, if we do not we keep haemorrhaging money. We are seeing small signs in the growth of a UK manufacturing. Build that back up and we will be winners again and pull out for sure.
luckylady
25-10-2011, 11:13
A rock and a hard place comes to mind. Why should we bale out other countries time and time again. That don't think it’s their responsibility to at least try to resolve their own money problems.
I wish we could cut loose, but at the moment I doubt we are in a financial position to deal with the consequences of doing so.
Never wanted to go in in the first place.
freddiehollie
25-10-2011, 16:03
Remember all the things we buy from Europe!! as well as, BMW, AUDI, MERCEDES, VW, CITROEN, PEUGEOT, RENAULT, ALFA etc etc.
They wouldn't want to lose or could afford to lose our custom.
The idea that the UK can somehow "pull out of Europe" is ridiculous. In today's hugely interlinked trade and financial, it's practically impossible to imagine any country operating independantly, especially when you're talking about the closest geographical neighbours. Yes, the EU benefits from sales to UK, but the reverse is also true. The notion that "pulling out" would leave Europe adrift and the UK in some kind of isolated nirvana is just wishful thinking. The UK is suffering from the economic global downturn as much as any other country, probably more so because of the UK reliance on the banking sector.
If your question is intended to be "Should the UK remain part of the European Union?" then I would question whether it was ever really in it, which is perhaps part of the problem for the UK. It wanted to be part of the club, but didn't want to follow all the club rules. It wanted freedom of trade, but didn't want to join the Euro. It wanted freedom of movement, but didn't want to join Schengen. The UK should not have to bail out countries like Greece, I agree, but in theory neither should Germany, and the UK involvement is absolutely nothing compared to what Germany and France are facing. But that's the problem with a common currency - you gain from common benefits, and you lose from common problems.
The Euro is a huge issue that will probably tear the EU apart soon. But as a currency it's doing OK. I've been in Germany for 11 years now, and the Euro is stronger against the UK pound at the moment than at almost any time in it's brief history.
I am unhappy with the EU. For me it is all about jobs for our children and a future for them. I've never had a say in the EU and my parents thought we were entering a Common Market not a European State.
I would like to understand what we pay in, what we get out, how much it costs to run the EU, how much trade do we get with it and what we'd get without it.
As I wrote to my local MP, I have to look at my bank balance and see what I can afford, what is value for money and what I am getting for it. No one seems able to do this for me with the EU. Bottom line is 'can I afford to belong to this club?'
I am unhappy with the EU. For me it is all about jobs for our children and a future for them. I've never had a say in the EU and my parents thought we were entering a Common Market not a European State.
I would like to understand what we pay in, what we get out, how much it costs to run the EU, how much trade do we get with it and what we'd get without it.
As I wrote to my local MP, I have to look at my bank balance and see what I can afford, what is value for money and what I am getting for it. No one seems able to do this for me with the EU. Bottom line is 'can I afford to belong to this club?'
Part of the problem is that the UK doesn't really "belong to this club". For many reasons the UK chose to only partially belong to Europe, and I think that is wrong. It pisses off the other European countries much more than you might realise, as they see the UK as wanting all the benefits but without paying the price of membership. Of course that view is not 100% correct either. But I do believe the UK should either have been fully in (including common currency and Schengen agreement) or fully out. That's why I voted that the "UK should renegotiate its relationship" - and I suspect that any referendum of the UK public right now would end in total withdrawal. I would vote for UK to stay in EU, because the benefits to me personally have been huge, but I realise that's not true for everyone.
SteveandJan
26-10-2011, 11:02
I am very unhappy with the EU and I have never had a chance to vote. For me like Denise it's about the future of my children. I don't believe it is a good thing, even before the financial problems. At the moment the UK government is taking the Commission to court because the EU commission wants the largest clearing house on financial transactions to locate out of the UK. That's says it all for me. Financial Services are a big service sector in the UK and this would have a huge impact on revenue and jobs for the UK, if they get their way. They churn out directive after directive every day. The UK pays in more than we get back, so I think it's time to say, it really hasn't worked for us. Anyway, who on earth thought a one size fits all would work. It would be the same if someone said "hey villa owners, you have to abide by one set of rules regardless of your size of villa", we know it wouldn't work for us and it clearly hasn't worked with the EU.
Part of the problem is that the UK doesn't really "belong to this club". For many reasons the UK chose to only partially belong to Europe, and I think that is wrong. It pisses off the other European countries much more than you might realise, as they see the UK as wanting all the benefits but without paying the price of membership. Of course that view is not 100% correct either. But I do believe the UK should either have been fully in (including common currency and Schengen agreement) or fully out. That's why I voted that the "UK should renegotiate its relationship" - and I suspect that any referendum of the UK public right now would end in total withdrawal. I would vote for UK to stay in EU, because the benefits to me personally have been huge, but I realise that's not true for everyone.
I think you are missing some of the main points keith. It really bugs me (wanted to use stronger words) when we are told what we can and cannot do, what we can call things and what we cannot and some of the stupid laws they impose on us like letting in doctors that can't speak English or are qualified enough killing Brits is TOTALLY NOT ACCEPTABLE.
Under NO circumstances should the UK be fully in and personally I would prefer us to to be fully out. They all hate us especially France (that's why we will never be part of the club) and we get stitched up time and time again. We put more money into the EU than will ever get out of it so I have never seen any advantages of being in it.
I am very unhappy with the EU and I have never had a chance to vote. For me like Denise it's about the future of my children. I don't believe it is a good thing, even before the financial problems. At the moment the UK government is taking the Commission to court because the EU commission wants the largest clearing house on financial transactions to locate out of the UK. That's says it all for me. Financial Services are a big service sector in the UK and this would have a huge impact on revenue and jobs for the UK, if they get their way. They churn out directive after directive every day. The UK pays in more than we get back, so I think it's time to say, it really hasn't worked for us. Anyway, who on earth thought a one size fits all would work. It would be the same if someone said "hey villa owners, you have to abide by one set of rules regardless of your size of villa", we know it wouldn't work for us and it clearly hasn't worked with the EU.
As I said, for me personally the EU is a good thing. I don't have children, but if I did their current and future well-being would be totally dependant upon the freedom of work and abode that the UK being part of the EU affords me. As is my future and current well-being. I fully understand the issues other people have with the EU and the way it operates for the UK. But that (in my view) is as much down to the way the UK wants (or not) to participate as it is with the way the EU operates.
The Euro in its current form was always going to be difficult to operate. The question is whether the solution is to break it apart and go back to the individual national currencies, or to go to a financial control model where most fiscal policy is set centrally (as in the USA). Personally I'd vote for the latter, because I live in Germany and I'm sick of bailing out "less responsible" countries, but if I lived in Greece or Portugal or even Ireland I'd probably have a different point of view.
I think you are missing some of the main points keith. It really bugs me (wanted to use stronger words) when we are told what we can and cannot do, what we can call things and what we cannot and some of the stupid laws they impose on us like letting in doctors that can't speak English or are qualified enough killing Brits is TOTALLY NOT ACCEPTABLE.
Under NO circumstances should the UK be fully in and personally I would prefer us to to be fully out. They all hate us especially France (that's why we will never be part of the club) and we get stitched up time and time again. We put more money into the EU than will ever get out of it so I have never seen any advantages of being in it.
I agree there are many negative points to being in the EU, and I would never argue otherwise. But I think a balanced viewpoint would also reveal many advantages, and the tabloid headline kind of arguments simply serve to obscure the real arguments. I could dig up many examples of jobs that would not exist if it were not for the EU. just as you could probably find many that have been lost because of the EU. I just personally don't believe that a country can stand alone in this day and age, and in fact I doubt many countries actually do, regardless of their sovereign tendencies.
The French don't hate the UK, and neither do the Germans - that's just a typical English egocentric view. On a day-to-day basis they couldn't care less about the UK. The Germans don't even consider England to be their traditional footballing enemy (that would be the Dutch) so they are all amazed when they read that the UK complains constantly about the EU. They just don't understand why the UK tries to be in both camps at once, and doesn't make a decision one way or the other. So in that respect, they are in total agreement with you :-)
SteveandJan
26-10-2011, 14:51
Total control from one central command is not a good idea. European countries managed with their own currencies for hundreds of years. People still had the freedom of movement before the EU, it's a smokescreen to tell us otherwise. You had to apply for a work permit and I don't see any wrong with that. If your skills and expertise is what that country wants, then you will always be able to have that opportunity and each country is able to control their own labour market to suit their needs, not theirs plus 25 other countries. I do hope I get my say and it will clearly be No. You only need to look at the common fisheries policy, we are throwing tons upon tons of food away and this has been going on for the past 10 years plus all because of one EU policy. The EU is too restrictive for each country's needs, they are not able to react quickly enough as can been seen with Greece. How is lending to Greece at punitive rates a good thing for them, they will never be able to get their country to grow again without total control. If Greece still had the drachma, they would never have got themselves into this mess and would be able to devalue. 80% of our laws in the UK are EU directives. I used to love to visit each country that had different currencies, and yes there were times when it was cheaper to Spain rather than Italy. I always used to holiday in Greece and I love the Greek Islands but since the introduction of the Euro, it has become very expensive. Every person that I know who is living abroad that adopted the Euro say how much everything went up after its introduction.
We are a democratic country, well so they say and I do hope that I get my say along with everyone else in the UK and all other EU citizens. When have the rest of Europe ever had a say?. France voted no to the last big treaty, along with Holland and Ireland and what happened, they got told go back and vote again. That is not democracy to me.
It's a great debate and I am so glad you raised it Steve and we all have our reasons for being in or out.
As I said, for me personally the EU is a good thing. I don't have children, but if I did their current and future well-being would be totally dependant upon the freedom of work and abode that the UK being part of the EU affords me. As is my future and current well-being. I fully understand the issues other people have with the EU and the way it operates for the UK. But that (in my view) is as much down to the way the UK wants (or not) to participate as it is with the way the EU operates.
The Euro in its current form was always going to be difficult to operate. The question is whether the solution is to break it apart and go back to the individual national currencies, or to go to a financial control model where most fiscal policy is set centrally (as in the USA). Personally I'd vote for the latter, because I live in Germany and I'm sick of bailing out "less responsible" countries, but if I lived in Greece or Portugal or even Ireland I'd probably have a different point of view.
I agree there are many negative points to being in the EU, and I would never argue otherwise. But I think a balanced viewpoint would also reveal many advantages, and the tabloid headline kind of arguments simply serve to obscure the real arguments. I could dig up many examples of jobs that would not exist if it were not for the EU. just as you could probably find many that have been lost because of the EU. I just personally don't believe that a country can stand alone in this day and age, and in fact I doubt many countries actually do, regardless of their sovereign tendencies.
The French don't hate the UK, and neither do the Germans - that's just a typical English egocentric view. On a day-to-day basis they couldn't care less about the UK. The Germans don't even consider England to be their traditional footballing enemy (that would be the Dutch) so they are all amazed when they read that the UK complains constantly about the EU. They just don't understand why the UK tries to be in both camps at once, and doesn't make a decision one way or the other. So in that respect, they are in total agreement with you :-)
You obviously didn't hear what the French President said about Cameron the other day then. The French always have hated and always will hate the English, it's a fact of life that you would see if you went to France.
Total control from one central command is not a good idea. European countries managed with their own currencies for hundreds of years. People still had the freedom of movement before the EU, it's a smokescreen to tell us otherwise. You had to apply for a work permit and I don't see any wrong with that. If your skills and expertise is what that country wants, then you will always be able to have that opportunity and each country is able to control their own labour market to suit their needs, not theirs plus 25 other countries. I do hope I get my say and it will clearly be No. You only need to look at the common fisheries policy, we are throwing tons upon tons of food away and this has been going on for the past 10 years plus all because of one EU policy. The EU is too restrictive for each country's needs, they are not able to react quickly enough as can been seen with Greece. How is lending to Greece at punitive rates a good thing for them, they will never be able to get their country to grow again without total control. If Greece still had the drachma, they would never have got themselves into this mess and would be able to devalue. 80% of our laws in the UK are EU directives. I used to love to visit each country that had different currencies, and yes there were times when it was cheaper to Spain rather than Italy. I always used to holiday in Greece and I love the Greek Islands but since the introduction of the Euro, it has become very expensive. Every person that I know who is living abroad that adopted the Euro say how much everything went up after its introduction.
We are a democratic country, well so they say and I do hope that I get my say along with everyone else in the UK and all other EU citizens. When have the rest of Europe ever had a say?. France voted no to the last big treaty, along with Holland and Ireland and what happened, they got told go back and vote again. That is not democracy to me.
It's a great debate and I am so glad you raised it Steve and we all have our reasons for being in or out.
Great post, spot on.
Part of the problem is that the UK doesn't really "belong to this club". For many reasons the UK chose to only partially belong to Europe, and I think that is wrong. It pisses off the other European countries much more than you might realise, as they see the UK as wanting all the benefits but without paying the price of membership. Of course that view is not 100% correct either. But I do believe the UK should either have been fully in (including common currency and Schengen agreement) or fully out. That's why I voted that the "UK should renegotiate its relationship" - and I suspect that any referendum of the UK public right now would end in total withdrawal. I would vote for UK to stay in EU, because the benefits to me personally have been huge, but I realise that's not true for everyone.
Until those that are responsible for the subscription to this club explain the pros and cons more fully the UK will question our membership... and then give the people their vote. I too voted for the UK to renegotiate but I would like the facts - something I don't think I've ever had.
If Greece still had the drachma, they would never have got themselves into this mess and would be able to devalue.
The "mess" the Greeks are in is not due to them being in the Euro. Rather it's due to decades of living beyond their means, a tendency to use the black economy rather than pay taxes, a civil service that is hugely overblown, and a fragile economy based on tourism. When the world economic crisis hit, and that fragile economy started to collapse, the Greeks found the harsh realities of economics hitting them. That would have happened whether Greece had the Euro, the drachma or green cheese as their currency. One thing is for sure, the world banks would NOT have accepted a 50% loss on Greek debt, nor bailed them out with another 100m Euros, if they'd been an independant country with their own currency. Devaluing their own currency would have done absolutely nothing to help Greece pay its debt. They are being bailed out because they are part of the Euro, with the backing of Germany and France standing surety, and that is what might actually save Greece. But they absolutely need to change the way they run their economy or it will all be for nothing.
Every person that I know who is living abroad that adopted the Euro say how much everything went up after its introduction.
Just like every person in the UK says how much everything went up when the country switched to a decimal currency in 1971. That's not a fault of the currency per se, rather the greed of the traders taking the chance to make a quick profit.
We are a democratic country, well so they say and I do hope that I get my say along with everyone else in the UK and all other EU citizens. When have the rest of Europe ever had a say?. France voted no to the last big treaty, along with Holland and Ireland and what happened, they got told go back and vote again. That is not democracy to me. .
That I absolutely agree with
You obviously didn't hear what the French President said about Cameron the other day then. The French always have hated and always will hate the English, it's a fact of life that you would see if you went to France.
You need to distinguish between a political soundbite from a president fighting for support for unpopular policies, that is aimed primarily at a sceptical domestic electorate, and the national sentiments of millions of people. Honestly, if you truly believe that the French hate the English then I feel sorry for you.
I go to France regularly, at least a couple of times a month - half of the company I work for is based in Nice, and I deal with French people every single day. My company is hugely multi-cultural - I live and work daily next to Germans, French, Italian, Spanish, Portuguese, Dutch, Czech, Hungarian, Russian, American, Canadian - 47 different nationalties at the last count. And none of them hate the English. This blinkered viewpoint is fostered by a xenophobic English tabloid press that is working to its own political agenda. No one in Europe can muster enough energy to even care one way or another about the UK, let alone hate them - they are too busy trying to manage their own lives to worry about the UK.
The "mess" the Greeks are in is not due to them being in the Euro. Rather it's due to decades of living beyond their means, a tendency to use the black economy rather than pay taxes, a civil service that is hugely overblown, and a fragile economy based on tourism. When the world economic crisis hit, and that fragile economy started to collapse, the Greeks found the harsh realities of economics hitting them. That would have happened whether Greece had the Euro, the drachma or green cheese as their currency. One thing is for sure, the world banks would NOT have accepted a 50% loss on Greek debt, nor bailed them out with another 100m Euros, if they'd been an independant country with their own currency. Devaluing their own currency would have done absolutely nothing to help Greece pay its debt. They are being bailed out because they are part of the Euro, with the backing of Germany and France standing surety, and that is what might actually save Greece. But they absolutely need to change the way they run their economy or it will all be for nothing.
Is this right though?
If Greece still had their own currency wouldn't they just devalue it (perhaps slowly over time) and in so doing they would just inflate their way out of debt? Plus the devaluation would boost their tourism industry.
For the banks, if Greece had their own currency and defaulted on their debts, wouldn't the world banks have no choice but to accept whatever haircut was necessary. My memory fails me but didn't something similar happen when Russia defaulted back in, was it 98 or 99?
Is this right though?
If Greece still had their own currency wouldn't they just devalue it (perhaps slowly over time) and in so doing they would just inflate their way out of debt? Plus the devaluation would boost their tourism industry.
For the banks, if Greece had their own currency and defaulted on their debts, wouldn't the world banks have no choice but to accept whatever haircut was necessary. My memory fails me but didn't something similar happen when Russia defaulted back in, was it 98 or 99?
How would lowering the value of their currency on the open markets help Greece pay back the billions it owes? It's debt is 160% of GDP and Greece is technically bankrupt. Without some money from somewhere Greece will soon be forced to default on its loan repayments. The banks might be forced (out of pragmatism) to accept a default on payment by Greece, but they certainly wouldn't lend them any more. It's only the guarantee of surety from the rest of the EU that has allowed Greece to borrow what it needs. That would mean Greece's economy would continue to stagnate, with no opportunity for cash injection to revitalise it. A devalued currency would also massively increase the price of imports.
I don't believe that a currency devaluation would boost Greece's tourism industry much. That industry has not collapsed because Greece is expensive compared to other tourist destinations. It has collapsed because of an unprecendented worldwide econmoic crisis that has seen all tourism hit. People are not travelling anywhere, it's not just Greece. It might lower the cost of a holiday to Greece by devaluing, but if no-one can afford a holiday anyway, what will it achieve?
How would lowering the value of their currency on the open markets help Greece pay back the billions it owes?
I don't claim to be an economist but I thought that happened because the debt would be denominated in Greece's currency, Drachma say?
So a hotel in Greece might currently offer a room for, say, 25,000 Drachma; and for want of any other figures, let's say that 20% of that eventually trickles back to the government in taxes. If the exchange rate against the Euro was EUR 1 = GRD 250, for someone from Europe booking that hotel room it would cost them around EUR 100. The Greek government would net 5,000 Drachma from this. That's either 5,000 Drachma or 20 Euros. If their debt is denominated in Drachma, they can repay 5,000 Drachma.
If Greece then inflated its currency by, say, 25%, in theory that same hotel room will cost GRD 31,250 and at the same time the exchange rate will fall to EUR 1 = GRD 312.5. Someone from Europe booking that hotel room will still pay EUR 100 for it because of the fall in the exchange rate. The Greek government would now net 20% of GRD 31,250 = GRD 6,250. So they can now afford to repay 6,250 Drachma.
This wouldn't address any structural problems the country might have (black market trade, size of public/government organisations, social security, etc.) so it's never going to be a permanent fix. But it could put a plaster on things for a while.
It's interesting stuff though Keith. I think we are in for a few interesting years, especially with the outcome of last night's agreement. If I might quote directly from the Beeb's website:
But perhaps most significant was eurozone leaders' announcement that there will be tougher controls in future on the budgets of member countries, integration of taxation, and a whole new framework for running the eurozone, including a new leadership structure which will rival the decision-making mechanism of the wider European Union.
The Europe five years from now might be quite a different beast from the Europe of today.
I don't claim to be an economist but I thought that happened because the debt would be denominated in Greece's currency, Drachma say?
So a hotel in Greece might currently offer a room for, say, 25,000 Drachma; and for want of any other figures, let's say that 20% of that eventually trickles back to the government in taxes. If the exchange rate against the Euro was EUR 1 = GRD 250, for someone from Europe booking that hotel room it would cost them around EUR 100. The Greek government would net 5,000 Drachma from this. That's either 5,000 Drachma or 20 Euros. If their debt is denominated in Drachma, they can repay 5,000 Drachma.
If Greece then inflated its currency by, say, 25%, in theory that same hotel room will cost GRD 31,250 and at the same time the exchange rate will fall to EUR 1 = GRD 312.5. Someone from Europe booking that hotel room will still pay EUR 100 for it because of the fall in the exchange rate. The Greek government would now net 20% of GRD 31,250 = GRD 6,250. So they can now afford to repay 6,250 Drachma.
This wouldn't address any structural problems the country might have (black market trade, size of public/government organisations, social security, etc.) so it's never going to be a permanent fix. But it could put a plaster on things for a while.
It's interesting stuff though Keith. I think we are in for a few interesting years, especially with the outcome of last night's agreement. If I might quote directly from the Beeb's website:
But perhaps most significant was eurozone leaders' announcement that there will be tougher controls in future on the budgets of member countries, integration of taxation, and a whole new framework for running the eurozone, including a new leadership structure which will rival the decision-making mechanism of the wider European Union.
The Europe five years from now might be quite a different beast from the Europe of today.
Well, my response to your proposal would be that the Greek repayment to the banks would then be worth 25% less than previously, so I'm not convinced the banks would accept that. In my view they are far too clever to accept a large debt nominated in a currency that was already weak, and likely to be devalued. More likely they would specify an internationally accepted currency such as the US dollar. But I'm not an economist either, just a concerned observer :-)
I certainly agree that if the EU/Euro survives this crisis (and I'm not 100% convinced it will) then the Europe that emerges will be a totally different place than it is today. Germany specifically would prefer a Europe fiscally controlled by the ECB, in which they have a huge say of course. I'm not sure that the rest of the European countries would accept that.
As you say, interesting stuff!
SteveandJan
27-10-2011, 11:53
Iceland has been managing since they defaulted and went bankrupt, the same as Argentina did many many years ago. Did either of these countries have bailouts from the EU, or have a stranglehold over their OWN affairs. I am aware many countries had to take a hit on the default, but this is no different to Greek debt. If Greece did not have cheap European money to borrow over the past 15 years which was thrown at them, they would have balanced the books, just like they did for thousands of year before the EU came along. They went along on the credit bubble just like everyone else. If they were not tied to the EU, and you can't get away from that fact, they would be able to manage their OWN affairs as they see fit and it would be the same for any other country had this happened. The Greek people have never been asked about this big social project, the politicians of all countries just plough ahead regardless of what, we the people want. Isn’t democracy what the people of Europe have enjoyed for centuries?
I work in London so I can see the effect it has on the financial services industry already, it churns out directives day after day, saying what we can’t or can do. There is a current court case in which the UK government has taken the Commission to court over our clearing houses. London has one of the biggest clearing houses in Europe and the EU wants to relocate that outside of the UK. That will cost the UK economy dearly in terms of loss of jobs and revenue to London. The UK relies heavily on revenue from the financial services sector, so that would a huge loss to the UK. I don’t think the EU will be happy until it’s one mass of people who have no identity and who are all sharing the same set of rules. I don’t want that and I don’t want that for my children. What next, that set of rules expanded to everywhere else in the world. Our car insurance has increased because the EU says everyone has to be treated the same, even though for many years women have had cheaper insurance because the statistics shows they are a lower risk but the EU says we can’t do that, so we have to abide by what they say.
I have already made up my mind and I can see from everyday events that the EU is not a good idea, greater fiscal and monetary control is not a good thing as clearly their sticking plaster is not working. It’s a grand social project gone horribly wrong, and it’s already down a slippery road and I will never vote nothing other than no. Everyone is entitled to vote how they wish but for myself and my family, it’s no. My parents voted for a free trade agreement, not total control.
Well everyone has their own viewpoint based on personal experience, and that's as it should be. I'm clearly not going to be able to convince anyone so there's little point continuing this discussion :-)
But it's interesting to note that almost 59% of people who voted on this poll want to remain within the EU in some form or another, mostly after renegotiation. I'm surprised and encouraged that the figure is that high.
In any case there should be a referendum so the UK tax payers (including me) can have their say. If there is a referendum, and there is a decision to pull out of the EU, I sincerely hope you get the utopia you're looking for.
Robert5988
27-10-2011, 16:59
Until those that are responsible for the subscription to this club explain the pros and cons more fully the UK will question our membership... - something I don't think I've ever had.
That is spot on.
Economists disagree - even those without vested interests!
Politicians disagree - well they would, wouldn't they!
What hope is there of us laymen getting objective unbiased information?
Instead we have emotive, and often illogical views expressed - "We won the war and those b&)**) Froggies and Krauts better remember that"
Well, my response to your proposal would be that the Greek repayment to the banks would then be worth 25% less than previously, so I'm not convinced the banks would accept that. In my view they are far too clever to accept a large debt nominated in a currency that was already weak, and likely to be devalued. More likely they would specify an internationally accepted currency such as the US dollar. But I'm not an economist either, just a concerned observer :-)
It's not worth any less though in the same currency. Typically I think most government borrowing happens in their local currency.
It's maybe better to think of Sterling as a better example with the Drachma no longer existing. When the UK government wants to borrow money they issue Sterling denominated bonds. The organisations that buy these bonds will be mostly GBP based - pension funds are typical, unit trusts, etc. As long as the government makes their repayments at the quoted rate of interest, whoever bought the bonds are typically happy. This is usually because they have a Sterling liability somewhere down the line. So as long as everything stays in-currency they don't really care what happens to Sterling against other currencies.
Loans from banks would be much the same. If they could keep everything in the same currency they're happy. If a foreign bank wanted to take an interest in a GBP government bond they'd likely just buy or sell currency futures to hedge out any currency risk.
Where this all went wrong for Greece is that they are using a currency that they have no control over, and which might (or rather was) operated in a way that was not consistent for the stability of the Greek economy.
Which is why it seems that one thrust of last night's agreement is going to be to tie Euro member states together much more closely in terms of fiscal policy. It will be interesting to see if this can be made to work as i) I'm not convinced that countries necessarily like other countries telling them what to do, and ii) Just because a government says it will do something does not necessarily mean that it will.
Robert5988
29-10-2011, 21:46
All these theories on Fiscal policy - this is how it works in Ireland!
What is a Financial Bail-Out ?
It is a slow day in a damp little Irish town. The rain is beating down
harshly, and all the streets are deserted. Times are tough, everybody
is in debt and everybody lives on credit.
...On this particular day a rich German tourist is driving through the
town, stops at the local hotel and lays a €100 note on the desk, telling
the hotel owner he wants to inspect the rooms upstairs in order to pick
one to spend the night.
The owner gives him some room-keys and, as soon as the visitor has
walked upstairs, the hotelier grabs the €100 note and runs next door to pay his
debt to the butcher.
The butcher takes the €100 note and rushes down the street to repay his
debt to the pig farmer. The pig farmer takes the €100 note and heads
off to pay his bill at the supplier of animal feed and fuel.
The guy at the Farmers' Co-op takes the €100 note and runs to pay his
drinks bill at the friendly neighbourhood pub. The pub owner slips the
money along to the local prostitute drinking at the bar - who, in spite of
facing hard times, has always gladly offered him her ‘services’ on credit.
The hooker then rushes over to the hotel and pays off her room bill to
the hotel owner with the €100 note.
The hotel proprietor quietly replaces the €100 note back on the
counter, so that the rich traveller will not suspect anything.
At that moment the traveller comes down the stairs, states that none of
the rooms are satisfactory, picks up the €100 note, pockets it and leaves
town.
...No one has produced anything. No one has earned anything. However,
the whole town is now out of debt and looking to the future with a lot more
optimism.
And that, dear ladies and gentlemen, is how a basic financial bailout
package works !
You need to distinguish between a political soundbite from a president fighting for support for unpopular policies, that is aimed primarily at a sceptical domestic electorate, and the national sentiments of millions of people. Honestly, if you truly believe that the French hate the English then I feel sorry for you.
I go to France regularly, at least a couple of times a month - half of the company I work for is based in Nice, and I deal with French people every single day. My company is hugely multi-cultural - I live and work daily next to Germans, French, Italian, Spanish, Portuguese, Dutch, Czech, Hungarian, Russian, American, Canadian - 47 different nationalties at the last count. And none of them hate the English. This blinkered viewpoint is fostered by a xenophobic English tabloid press that is working to its own political agenda. No one in Europe can muster enough energy to even care one way or another about the UK, let alone hate them - they are too busy trying to manage their own lives to worry about the UK.
I think you need to get back in touch with reality. The whole of Europe hates us, the Eurovision song contest is a great example of that. We could enter a song that would sell 4 million records and we would still be voted at the bottom.
Regret I've come to a slightly differing conclusion: The French just hate anyone not French !!! [msnsmile]
For many years I worked for a Belgian multinational & attended regular training courses in Belgium - always taken in English, though attended by folks of many nationalities.
The only nationals to ever object were French, who insisted in changing the setup language of any computer equipment thay could get their hands on into French & then sulking or walking out when everything was reset to english for the benefit of everyone else !!!
The general reaction of every other nationality was to shrug shoulders "They're French......"
(Sorry to any & all Francophiles hereabouts)
I should also explain that this was in Antwerp - not Brussels where French is the 'in' language !!!!
florida4sun
30-10-2011, 16:58
Utter nonsense, I deal with pretty much the whole of Europe, booking musicians for tours and touring myself. Most artists steer clear of the UK as they are grated so badly in comparison with Europe. The French/Germans and the rst adore the talent we have, treat them well and we pome them with open arms. Not once have I or the english artists I deal with had any negativity, quite the opposite. Treated like kings and queens, very unlike touring the UK.
The only negativity I hear is from Brits, saying Europe hates us. It simply is not true and is a myth. That's based on hard experience. Common Paul you cannot base it on the Eurovision, they have had years of Wotan taking the piss and the whole thing is a joke.
I think you need to get back in touch with reality. The whole of Europe hates us, the Eurovision song contest is a great example of that. We could enter a song that would sell 4 million records and we would still be voted at the bottom.
We were in Belgium this weekend at the Menin Gate and were speaking to lots of different nationalities and did not encounter any problems at all - everyone was very friendly even when speaking to a French person and I had to ask them to slow down as they were talking to fast for me to catch all they were saying. Perhaps talking back to them in slower French helped but the Flemish speakers (which is where Leper is) were more than happy to speak in English as my Flemish is very restricted mainly to how to get around and what to order off a menu. Our youngest has been working in Germany since August as part of his PhD and he has said he has not had any problems either and found the Germans very helpful and kind.
I think you need to get back in touch with reality. The whole of Europe hates us, the Eurovision song contest is a great example of that. We could enter a song that would sell 4 million records and we would still be voted at the bottom.
Your viewpoint of more than 850 million people is based on an annual song contest that has been a laughing stock for over 50 years, and you tell me to get back in touch with reality?
I feel sorry for you, Paul, I really do...your world must be a very lonely place.
Your viewpoint of more than 850 million people is based on an annual song contest that has been a laughing stock for over 50 years, and you tell me to get back in touch with reality?
I feel sorry for you, Paul, I really do...your world must be a very lonely place.
I feel sorry for you because you haven't got a clue what you are talking about and won't accept the fact that we are hated by the whole of Europe.
Utter nonsense, I deal with pretty much the whole of Europe, booking musicians for tours and touring myself. Most artists steer clear of the UK as they are grated so badly in comparison with Europe. The French/Germans and the rst adore the talent we have, treat them well and we pome them with open arms. Not once have I or the english artists I deal with had any negativity, quite the opposite. Treated like kings and queens, very unlike touring the UK.
The only negativity I hear is from Brits, saying Europe hates us. It simply is not true and is a myth. That's based on hard experience. Common Paul you cannot base it on the Eurovision, they have had years of Wotan taking the piss and the whole thing is a joke.
You are talking abut a very select small area of people. In my extensive dealings with Europeans they do not like us, it is not a myth it is a fact.
FraserLynn
31-10-2011, 19:02
You are talking abut a very select small area of people. In my extensive dealings with Europeans they do not like us, it is not a myth it is a fact.
Have you ever considered the fact that it might be you they don't like rather than us? Now that I could understand.....
florida4sun
31-10-2011, 19:50
Paul,
We have property and family in Germany and France and I deal with around 300 concerts a year. That involves dealing with many different business (venues, public venues, hotels, airlines, embasseys, local and national government, press, local businesses to venues). The only way I would have any more experience is by moving over there, which is on the cards. Not once I had any negativity at all. Quite the opposite.
Oh and I am German too. If your dealings extend further, then I bow to you ;)
You are talking abut a very select small area of people. In my extensive dealings with Europeans they do not like us, it is not a myth it is a fact.
This thread started off as an interesting poll and an even more interesting discussion, on a topic that hugely affects all of us. But it has turned it into a xenophobic rant that I want no part of.
So in words of Theo Paphitis, "for that reason, I'm out"
In the hope of bringing this thread back around to a more friendly discussion, I wondered if I could ask anyone who voted on option 3 (renegotiate the UK's position with Europe) if they might voice an opinon on what they would like to see done differently? What would you like our involvement to be ... and vice versa .... what don't you mind Europe being in control of?
Personally I found last week's decision quite interesting; albeit that there seems to be a lot of detail yet to work out. If fully implemented it does look like it could lead to a two-tier Europe where the 'core' members have a much tighter integration (including policies such as tax and national spending) and where the 'non-core' members do not get any say in how these 'core' policies are set.
To flip the question around a bit; only 5 people out of 68 (about 1 in every 13) voted that they would like the UK to remain a part of Europe. Even if the UK were to remain a 'non-core' member of whatever a future Europe might look like, what does everything think this would mean in terms of things like trade, travel, etc.? Could we thrive as a country if we go independent?
florida4sun
01-11-2011, 11:15
Are we thriving now?
Could we thrive as a country if we go independent?
I voted option three and I think that we should be returning to the original idea of a trading area.
The government of this country should be responsible for all laws that affect it's citizens. We may not like them but at least we have a vote at the next election.
The buck should stop with somebody here in the UK that can be held responsible for any decisions that are made.
Regards Dave
Does anyone now have a difference of opinion in light of the announcement by Greece regarding their referendum on the bailout?
SteveandJan
01-11-2011, 13:32
Keith, that is very childish to say that people who talk against the EU are xenophobic. It isn’t the case. We can all have an open grown up debate about it and we all feel why it is good, or why it isn't good.
I voted no, because the EU is a dictatorship. I don’t see it any different. Directives are churned out on a daily basis telling us what we should do. What happens when the UK loses it’s court case against the EU because they want to relocate our clearing hours from the UK? This will mean huge job losses and revenue but why should the EU tell the UK where it must locate its clearing houses? What would be the next industry to relocate at the request of the EU. That indicates a dictatorship to me, otherwise the UK government would not be taking the EU to court to overturn this. What happens if the UK loses this court case, huge job losses in London. We are wasting money on defending our right to locate our financial clearing houses. If a financial transaction tax is imposed, this will have a huge impact on the financial services sector and this will mean thousands of job losses. It may not damage other countries as much, but the UK has a large financial services industry. This is the reality of the matter for the UK.
80% of our laws are from the EU. One size fits all does not work, one interest rate, one currency. Red tape on a daily basis, creation of quangos from the EU. Our measurements changed to metric, working time directives, agency workers rights, and environmental directives to name just a few. Of course I understand that some of these laws give greater rights to workers as well as employers but these should be made by the UK government only. This is what is stifling growth, not being flexible to the needs of each country.
I may have voted to stay in with just a trade agreement a long time ago but I now see the EU for what it is.
I would like to hear also how other people feel about remaining in and what parts they enjoy being part of the EU.
Does anyone now have a difference of opinion in light of the announcement by Greece regarding their referendum on the bailout?
Yeah - they've played a bit of a blinder with that today haven't they Jill?
Anyone care to speculate whether Greece will still be a European member state in 12 months time?
Keith, that is very childish to say that people who talk against the EU are xenophobic. It isn’t the case. We can all have an open grown up debate about it and we all feel why it is good, or why it isn't good.
If Paul had put forward some reasoned arguments against UK membership of the EU then fine, let's have an open grown up debate. I already said that this was an interesting discussion on a hugely important topic. I am pro-EU, many are anti, that's the basis for a good discussion. I live in Germany and therefore have perhaps a different viewpoint from many on here, one that I thought was worth stating.
My complaint was against the "they all hate us, they always have and always will" stance taken by Paul. That is just the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard, it is patently untrue and (in my opinion) xenophobic.
If that makes me childish, then so be it. You are free to disagree of course.
Keith, that is very childish to say that people who talk against the EU are xenophobic. It isn’t the case. We can all have an open grown up debate about it and we all feel why it is good, or why it isn't good.
I voted no, because the EU is a dictatorship. I don’t see it any different. Directives are churned out on a daily basis telling us what we should do. What happens when the UK loses it’s court case against the EU because they want to relocate our clearing hours from the UK? This will mean huge job losses and revenue but why should the EU tell the UK where it must locate its clearing houses? What would be the next industry to relocate at the request of the EU. That indicates a dictatorship to me, otherwise the UK government would not be taking the EU to court to overturn this. What happens if the UK loses this court case, huge job losses in London. We are wasting money on defending our right to locate our financial clearing houses. If a financial transaction tax is imposed, this will have a huge impact on the financial services sector and this will mean thousands of job losses. It may not damage other countries as much, but the UK has a large financial services industry. This is the reality of the matter for the UK.
80% of our laws are from the EU. One size fits all does not work, one interest rate, one currency. Red tape on a daily basis, creation of quangos from the EU. Our measurements changed to metric, working time directives, agency workers rights, and environmental directives to name just a few. Of course I understand that some of these laws give greater rights to workers as well as employers but these should be made by the UK government only. This is what is stifling growth, not being flexible to the needs of each country.
I may have voted to stay in with just a trade agreement a long time ago but I now see the EU for what it is.
I would like to hear also how other people feel about remaining in and what parts they enjoy being part of the EU.
Great post.
Shame Keith doesn't talk as much sense as you do.
floridadreamvilla.co.uk
02-11-2011, 15:46
This is getting very tedious now and touching on being personal. Any more of it and I'll reluctantly lock the thread. It's ok to disagree with someone, but let's not get personal as it's totally uncalled for.
Well the first time I could ever vote was on the issue of joining the EU. I voted in favour as this seemed extremely beneficial to us as a nation, although there were many concerns raised by the Commonwealth who used to supply us with quite alot of our food in those days. At no stage do I remember ever voting on Europe becoming a combined state and handing over responsibility for our laws. Whilst I am all for trading made as easy as possible between all European nations, I do think responsibility for our laws should remain in the power of our MPs who are elected officials, and we have the ability to remove if we do not like what they do. We seem to have no come-back against the decisions made and no-one we can vote out of power.
We buy from Europe and travel frequently there and have found the majority of people to be charming and helpful, who put us to shame with their ability to speak our language so we don't make the effort!
Lets face it, we will never be allowed a vote on the subject of Europe along with a number of other important issues, as the political parties cannot trust us to give the answer they want. You only have to look at the way the rest of them started panicing as soon as the Greeks annouced a possible referendum.
I am afraid we are all regarded as small children by the political classes, as we are clearly incapeable of knowing whats best for ourselves.
We do get a vote though Graham - every four or five years. Anyone feeling strongly enough about this could vote UKIP. Very few (relatively speaking) did so at the last election.
There were also two opportunities to vote Labour out of office prior to them signing us up to the Lisbon Treaty; although to be fair they were promising a referendum on it at the time. It's a shame they turned out to be a bunch of liars. It would have been interesting to see how that one would have gone. The economic environment was somewhat different at that time so I wonder if as many people back then would have been so engaged in what was happening?
I do agree we get a vote every 4/5 years Steve, but there are so many things rolled into that one vote that you have to go for the least worse, in your opinion, that individual issues get lost.
When it comes to a specific vote on a specific subject they all run scared of letting us loose.