Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,808 Year: 3,065/9,624 Month: 910/1,588 Week: 93/223 Day: 4/17 Hour: 1/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Brexit - Should they stay or should they go?
Diomedes
Member
Posts: 995
From: Central Florida, USA
Joined: 09-13-2013


Message 16 of 887 (785530)
06-06-2016 1:39 PM
Reply to: Message 15 by nwr
06-06-2016 1:12 PM


I still think the idea of a united Europe is a good one. But I've always thought that it was a mistake to go to a common currency. The problems that you are seeing, such as the influence of the bankers, is because of that mistake.
Not that I am his biggest fan, but Alan Greenspan said exactly that. One of the side effects of moving to a common currency is inflationary pressures in the EU were not uniform. Depending on what currency was replaced, inflation moved at a more rapid pace in some countries versus others. Germany had lower inflation pressures because the deutsche mark was a more powerful currency relative to say, the Greek Drachma or the Spanish peseta.
One other issue in the EU is the manner in which regulations are being handled. Regulations exist the world over, but there are now many cases emerging in the EU where larger corporations are using stricter EU regulations to push out smaller businesses who have a more difficult time conforming to the broader laws. Now I am not anti-regulation by any stretch of the imagination, but at the same time, the way the laws and the influence exists in the EU, specific regulatory initiatives can be enacted that a larger corporation can easily absorb as part of their cost structure versus a smaller ma and pa outfit that runs on narrow margins.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by nwr, posted 06-06-2016 1:12 PM nwr has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 17 by caffeine, posted 06-06-2016 1:58 PM Diomedes has replied

  
caffeine
Member (Idle past 1024 days)
Posts: 1800
From: Prague, Czech Republic
Joined: 10-22-2008


Message 17 of 887 (785532)
06-06-2016 1:58 PM
Reply to: Message 16 by Diomedes
06-06-2016 1:39 PM


One other issue in the EU is the manner in which regulations are being handled. Regulations exist the world over, but there are now many cases emerging in the EU where larger corporations are using stricter EU regulations to push out smaller businesses who have a more difficult time conforming to the broader laws. Now I am not anti-regulation by any stretch of the imagination, but at the same time, the way the laws and the influence exists in the EU, specific regulatory initiatives can be enacted that a larger corporation can easily absorb as part of their cost structure versus a smaller ma and pa outfit that runs on narrow margins.
National governments also regulate markets, however, so this is hardly a problem unique to the EU. The cross-border harmonisation of market standards does, however, make it much easier for said ma and pa outfit to branch out and open an second store across the border in Lille - something that was never a problem for the big company with a team of lawyers equipped to deal with 28 separate regulatory regimes.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by Diomedes, posted 06-06-2016 1:39 PM Diomedes has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 18 by Diomedes, posted 06-06-2016 2:12 PM caffeine has replied

  
Diomedes
Member
Posts: 995
From: Central Florida, USA
Joined: 09-13-2013


Message 18 of 887 (785533)
06-06-2016 2:12 PM
Reply to: Message 17 by caffeine
06-06-2016 1:58 PM


National governments also regulate markets, however, so this is hardly a problem unique to the EU. The cross-border harmonisation of market standards does, however, make it much easier for said ma and pa outfit to branch out and open an second store across the border in Lille - something that was never a problem for the big company with a team of lawyers equipped to deal with 28 separate regulatory regimes.
Once again, it comes down to how the regulatory environment is influenced and how the regulations operate within the EU structure. One of the cases cited by Brexit proponents was a situation where a UK small business owner, a salmon smoker (note: someone who makes smoked salmon, not someone who rolls salmon doobies ) had to spend copious amounts of money on the packaging of his product to conform to the allergy regulations of the EU that require any fish product to be labelled as containing 'fish'. And even though his market was local, he still had to conform to this regulation, which cost him thousands of pounds per year in paper work and associated labeling costs.
Now granted this is likely an extreme case. If it even exists since the person citing this example was a staunch anti-EU individual. Nonetheless, as we have all realized in our own election cycle, once something is posited (build a UUGE wall for example), the counter-points to the argument are often lost or ineffectual.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 17 by caffeine, posted 06-06-2016 1:58 PM caffeine has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 19 by caffeine, posted 06-06-2016 2:39 PM Diomedes has not replied

  
caffeine
Member (Idle past 1024 days)
Posts: 1800
From: Prague, Czech Republic
Joined: 10-22-2008


Message 19 of 887 (785537)
06-06-2016 2:39 PM
Reply to: Message 18 by Diomedes
06-06-2016 2:12 PM


Once again, it comes down to how the regulatory environment is influenced and how the regulations operate within the EU structure. One of the cases cited by Brexit proponents was a situation where a UK small business owner, a salmon smoker (note: someone who makes smoked salmon, not someone who rolls salmon doobies ) had to spend copious amounts of money on the packaging of his product to conform to the allergy regulations of the EU that require any fish product to be labelled as containing 'fish'. And even though his market was local, he still had to conform to this regulation, which cost him thousands of pounds per year in paper work and associated labeling costs.
It is certainly true that recent EU regulations require allergy labelling on packaging. This is not some magic result of them being EU regulations, however. The same would be the case if they were national laws. In considering whether this is something imposed on Britain against its will, I ahd a look a the voting records of the European Council - the UK government voted for this legislation.
That's just the government of course, not the Parliament, which is supposed to be the sovereign body. What happened when the act enshrining this into British law was laid before Parliament? Well, they voted it into law.*
That aside I cannot fathom how this would cost him thousands in paperwork. Restaurants round here met the regulations by printing new versions of their menus with allergy notes. One simply printed a white A4 sheet of paper. This 'thousands of pounds per year' sounds like bollocks to me.
*I had intended to cite the result of the vote in the Commons, but this is frustrating difficult to find. Frustrating since I know it's freely available online. Some work needs to be put into Hansard's search functions when knowing the name of an Act of Parliament and the year it was voted on is insufficient to locate the result of the vote on it.
Now granted this is likely an extreme case. If it even exists since the person citing this example was a staunch anti-EU individual. Nonetheless, as we have all realized in our own election cycle, once something is posited (build a UUGE wall for example), the counter-points to the argument are often lost or ineffectual.
And this is the most frustrating of all. So much of the debate is totally disconnected from any real problems with the EU (which, of course, there are). It's about made up nonsense like straight bananas.
Edited by caffeine, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by Diomedes, posted 06-06-2016 2:12 PM Diomedes has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 20 by Tangle, posted 06-06-2016 3:36 PM caffeine has seen this message but not replied

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 9489
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 4.9


Message 20 of 887 (785540)
06-06-2016 3:36 PM
Reply to: Message 19 by caffeine
06-06-2016 2:39 PM


caffeiene writes:
And this is the most frustrating of all. So much of the debate is totally disconnected from any real problems with the EU (which, of course, there are). It's about made up nonsense like straight bananas.
If we leave, it's going to be interesting to see who gets blamed for all the inevitable 'straight bananas' and food labelling requirements that cost 'thousands.' It's useful to have scapegoats.
What's not being factored into this is how much the UK - what's left of it when Scotland demands to leave the UK over it - gets hammered by the EU in order to deter others from also leaving. It's not going to be easy to negotiate our terms - only a fool would think otherwise.

Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien.
Life, don't talk to me about life - Marvin the Paranoid Android
"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 19 by caffeine, posted 06-06-2016 2:39 PM caffeine has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 21 by Diomedes, posted 06-06-2016 4:22 PM Tangle has replied

  
Diomedes
Member
Posts: 995
From: Central Florida, USA
Joined: 09-13-2013


Message 21 of 887 (785542)
06-06-2016 4:22 PM
Reply to: Message 20 by Tangle
06-06-2016 3:36 PM


If we leave, it's going to be interesting to see who gets blamed for all the inevitable 'straight bananas' and food labelling requirements that cost 'thousands.' It's useful to have scapegoats.
Generally speaking, fear-mongers don't think that far ahead. Consider Trump and his 'UUGE WALL' or all the talk of ending NAFTA. My guess is they could do both and neither would have any discernable effect on the job prospects of the middle class. Since what is REALLY happening is the big wigs at the top are shipping those jobs to cheap labor markets elsewhere.
what's left of it when Scotland demands to leave the UK over it
You bring up what I think is the most salient point in this discussion: if Brexit occurs, will that not embolden the nationalistic elements of Scotland to start work on another referendum?
As Ringo will attest, as can I as someone who grew up in Canada during all the Quebec separation talks, that can go on for a very long time.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 20 by Tangle, posted 06-06-2016 3:36 PM Tangle has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 22 by Tangle, posted 06-06-2016 6:12 PM Diomedes has not replied

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 9489
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 4.9


Message 22 of 887 (785547)
06-06-2016 6:12 PM
Reply to: Message 21 by Diomedes
06-06-2016 4:22 PM


Diomedes writes:
if Brexit occurs, will that not embolden the nationalistic elements of Scotland to start work on another referendum?
Yes, and it's highly likely, almost inevitable that that will happen.
There's even a possibility that Wales would wake up and go the same way. Cameron would then go down in history as the guy that not only left the EU but also broke the Union.
Maybe, in the end, all that would not be totally devastating but for a couple of generations it will be a disaster.

Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien.
Life, don't talk to me about life - Marvin the Paranoid Android
"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 21 by Diomedes, posted 06-06-2016 4:22 PM Diomedes has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 26 by caffeine, posted 06-07-2016 12:12 PM Tangle has not replied
 Message 28 by Pressie, posted 06-08-2016 8:56 AM Tangle has not replied

  
NosyNed
Member
Posts: 8996
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003


Message 23 of 887 (785549)
06-06-2016 9:00 PM
Reply to: Message 8 by Pressie
06-06-2016 6:15 AM


Nervous
I am avoiding any big purchase until after the Brexit vote because it WILL affect my investments here in Canada. It is not at all just a UK thing.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by Pressie, posted 06-06-2016 6:15 AM Pressie has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 25 by Pressie, posted 06-07-2016 7:39 AM NosyNed has not replied

  
Pressie
Member
Posts: 2103
From: Pretoria, SA
Joined: 06-18-2010


(1)
Message 24 of 887 (785561)
06-07-2016 7:19 AM
Reply to: Message 9 by Tangle
06-06-2016 7:07 AM


I hear what you say, Tangle, but also realise that if California became an independent country today, they would be the seventh largest economy in the world. And they would still carry on having more cultural influence overseas than the Brits do. The Kardashians and Arnie and all that. And also be a nuclear power.
Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 9 by Tangle, posted 06-06-2016 7:07 AM Tangle has not replied

  
Pressie
Member
Posts: 2103
From: Pretoria, SA
Joined: 06-18-2010


Message 25 of 887 (785563)
06-07-2016 7:39 AM
Reply to: Message 23 by NosyNed
06-06-2016 9:00 PM


Re: Nervous
I can't see how a Brexit vote will affect the huge investment I made years ago in a coastal property in Northern Queensland, Australia. Climate change will be a much more relevant variable to consider.
Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 23 by NosyNed, posted 06-06-2016 9:00 PM NosyNed has not replied

  
caffeine
Member (Idle past 1024 days)
Posts: 1800
From: Prague, Czech Republic
Joined: 10-22-2008


Message 26 of 887 (785586)
06-07-2016 12:12 PM
Reply to: Message 22 by Tangle
06-06-2016 6:12 PM


Yes, and it's highly likely, almost inevitable that that will happen.
Which is quite interesting from a historical perspective, since when Britain had a referendum on whether to leave the EEC back in the seventies, the Scottish were much more likely to vote in favour of leaving than the English. The only counties in the whole UK where a majority voted to leave were the Shetlands and the Western Isles.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by Tangle, posted 06-06-2016 6:12 PM Tangle has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 27 by Pressie, posted 06-08-2016 8:47 AM caffeine has not replied

  
Pressie
Member
Posts: 2103
From: Pretoria, SA
Joined: 06-18-2010


Message 27 of 887 (785622)
06-08-2016 8:47 AM
Reply to: Message 26 by caffeine
06-07-2016 12:12 PM


Thanks for the info.
Their children voted to remain in Britain at the last referendum a year or two ago. It's so different now, isn't it?
Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 26 by caffeine, posted 06-07-2016 12:12 PM caffeine has not replied

  
Pressie
Member
Posts: 2103
From: Pretoria, SA
Joined: 06-18-2010


Message 28 of 887 (785623)
06-08-2016 8:56 AM
Reply to: Message 22 by Tangle
06-06-2016 6:12 PM


Tangle writes:
Yes, and it's highly likely, almost inevitable that that will happen.
To me it also seems inevitable that some part of the UK (England) will leave the EU eventually.
Northern Ireland will join the rest of Ireland in the EU...what will happen to Scotland and Wales I don't know.
Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.
Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.
Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by Tangle, posted 06-06-2016 6:12 PM Tangle has not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1404 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 29 of 887 (785748)
06-10-2016 12:55 AM
Reply to: Message 14 by caffeine
06-06-2016 12:59 PM


I'm not really sure how you tie the immigrant issue into an idea of corporate oligarchy running the EU. If by immigrants you mean the refugee crisis, then I'm not sure the corporate oligarchy would have a unified view on the issue. ...
Two things: first I lump refugee with wilful immigrants -- both are looking to improve their lot -- and second I think immigration should be without barrier or constraint, certainly without being penned up in counterproductive camps. If more people were able to vote with their feet perhaps wars would not be so prevalent.
But they would also tend to go where the benefits and pay are better, so companies would have to up their share to the workers to keep workers. Corporations tend to like keeping a cadre of cheap(er) labor.
Worth bearing in mind, however, is the enormous day-today benefits we gain from the unification of the European market ...
Going to a common currency certainly helped unify the various states in the early US history, so a common currency is not a bad idea, but does it need a whole government structure to implement? Would not the world benefit from a single currency if that were the case? Probably.
... and the abolition of trade barriers ...
The abolition of trade barriers between states was also a good thing in the early US history, but the elimination of trade barriers between countries (NAFTA etc) with significant differences in the way workers are treated has been a disaster for the middle class workers in the US as jobs are shipped overseas for cheaper labor and lower safety and environmental controls.
Again, open borders can accomplish the same thing without another layer of government oversight. and the tendency of corporations to go where low wage workers are would be countered by the tendency of workers to go where the better working conditions are -- if they had the freedom to go.
Personally I think the CEO and Board of Directors model of corporations needs to be changed to a democratic worker owned company model.
Google Basque Worker Co-op for some interesting information or see Mondragon Corporation - Wikipedia
Enjoy

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆Zen☯Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 14 by caffeine, posted 06-06-2016 12:59 PM caffeine has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 30 by caffeine, posted 06-10-2016 1:05 PM RAZD has seen this message but not replied

  
caffeine
Member (Idle past 1024 days)
Posts: 1800
From: Prague, Czech Republic
Joined: 10-22-2008


Message 30 of 887 (785778)
06-10-2016 1:05 PM
Reply to: Message 29 by RAZD
06-10-2016 12:55 AM


Two things: first I lump refugee with wilful immigrants -- both are looking to improve their lot -- and second I think immigration should be without barrier or constraint, certainly without being penned up in counterproductive camps. If more people were able to vote with their feet perhaps wars would not be so prevalent.
But they would also tend to go where the benefits and pay are better, so companies would have to up their share to the workers to keep workers. Corporations tend to like keeping a cadre of cheap(er) labor.
One of the founding principles of the EU is free and unrestricted movement within the EU - that's the whole point.
I'm a bit confused by what you're saying about the refugee crisis, though. I think you need to distinguish between the actions of the EU, and actions of member states.
Going to a common currency certainly helped unify the various states in the early US history, so a common currency is not a bad idea, but does it need a whole government structure to implement? Would not the world benefit from a single currency if that were the case? Probably.
By unification of the market I don't mean the single currency - the EU as a whole still has about ten currencies after all. I mean the free movement of goods, labour, services and capital.
The abolition of trade barriers between states was also a good thing in the early US history, but the elimination of trade barriers between countries (NAFTA etc) with significant differences in the way workers are treated has been a disaster for the middle class workers in the US as jobs are shipped overseas for cheaper labor and lower safety and environmental controls.
But the EU is fundamentally different than something like NAFTA; since the free movement of [i]labour[i] is enshrined into it's law along with the free movement of goods and capital. And this is one of the reasons we have a common governance structure - to enforce minimum standards of labour rights and environmental controls across the open market.
We've created a zone of open borders where people can move where they like and, upon settling in a new country, immediately become legally equivalent to a citizen in almost every respect. Doesn't this sound like the sort of thing you were looking for?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 29 by RAZD, posted 06-10-2016 12:55 AM RAZD has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 31 by Diomedes, posted 06-15-2016 2:28 PM caffeine has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024