Re: Brexit, The Lies.
Originally Posted by
JBR
->
The trouble is that the EU is not only a trading block. It is a political organisation now which takes it upon itself to create laws to which all of its member countries are subject.
That's right but I don't think most of the members want it to be moving towards closer unification. They want a trading block with some closer ties but not anything that totally removes sovereignty. We were in a position to fight to change the strategy but acted like our view didn't count. I am for a trading block, shared standards, security, buying power etc. All the stuff that makes sense for business and ease of transactions. but not for any loss of individual culture, language, autonomy of law and always for special exemptions. The euro was a sticking point because it makes so much sense to have a single currency but it's such a bad idea where there is any economic disparity. But we didn't join the euro.
We didn't do so many things we don't agree with so I fail to understand the problem. We would not have been in the closer union. We were outside schengen, outside the euro etc. A neighbour said that this was nothing to do with europe but about people sticking two fingers up at the government. This is what annoys me most. That's no good for the country. To leave a successful (ish) trading block because we don't like the way our own government is working. Bizarre.
Originally Posted by
JBR
->
When it was a trading block - the EEC - I would be the first to suggest that we stay a member.
I am glad that we can agree on something. I also agree to a trading block, I did not agree to euro expansion (neither did the government), but we as a country did not really integrate further. So... why would we leave? - immigration? it's within our control -
we chose not to control it.
Originally Posted by
JBR
->
Well, the plans to divide each country into EU regions should ring alarm bells, and the concept of an EU Army controlled, presumably, by Brussels (or Berlin perhaps). The European Commission, which creates the laws handed down to us, is not an elected body at least by us and other ordinary citizens of EU countries..
Again I am against taking away nation status. Nobody has appetite for this. But once again I think we can only influence it by staying in and using our clout. We had all the cards in our hand and chose not to play them by taking a bigger part of ownership of management. In terms of the army it is no different than NATO. I'm not sure I understand the opposition. Merkel is no nazi. She was born into a communist state, her grandfather was Polish. She wasn't a good communist. She's a scientist at heart. We are better off with her than with the alternatives.
Originally Posted by
JBR
->
Above all we have the EU negotiators demanding money from us before we leave and before they will discuss anything else pertaining to Brexit and, what's more, without providing any explanation of how the figure is arrived at.
Swim has already explained what this is made up of. There are certain obligations when you leave such an entrenched union. It may be excessive, but they are losing out a fair bit with our choices.
Originally Posted by
JBR
->
I can see where the EU is heading. Can't you? And you think we should remain a member?
I think we should remain to influence where it's heading and to take advantage of a trading block. I think purely from the point of view of transaction costs, ease of process, certainty of terms of trade, shared systems, standards, etc. We can influence change but we are too lazy, this is the problem. We will find it difficult to be the opposite of lazy. We should have been a mover and shaker not billy no mates. It's said that Britain innovates and other nations profit. I see this as our major weakness.
The inability to see our own value and use it to our advantage.
How will Brexit change that?