> fiscal and banking mismanagement in Greece/Italy/Spain/Portugual are destroying German and British
The fact that Greece/Italy/Spain/Portugual devalue the Euro below where a deutsche mark would be is a major component of Germany's success as an exporter over the last decade, and conversely those countries' inability to devalue their currency has caused them a great deal of pain.
> Greece/Italy/Spain/Portugual are destroying German and British wealth
Just wait and see what "destroying wealth" means.
England gave up on producing food during the Industrial Revolution, gave up on imperial colonialism after WWII and gave up on manufacturing after Thatcher. Now it is giving up on the services economy. It will be interesting to see what comes out of it.
Edit: Britain is not a paragon of fiscal responsibility. The only reason it hasn't been punished by the markets is because the markets are, to a great extent, in London. Things will change a lot.
Possible ending of free movement of people? Possible emigration of the finance industry because of that and because of loss of institutional "passporting"?
Okay. Thanks for letting us know. I've always thought that dozens (or even hundreds) of governments from all political sides and from 28 different countries could not have gotten a project entirely wrong that they supported voluntarily for the mutual benefit of all member states during the past 40 years, but since you think otherwise I'll just take your word for it.
Real per capita GDP was 26,200 euros in 2007 and is 26,300 today. After 10 years of EU policymaking and an extraordinary borrowing spree, nothing to show for it.
That same table is showing a GDP rise from 23,400 to 26,200 between 2001 and 2008. Are those rises not attributable to EU policymaking then?
In the same time period, US GDP rose from $49,979 to $51,486 [1]. But it shows the same drop as the EU figures: 2014 was the first year that GDP was higher than 2007 (the same in 2015 for the EU). Maybe there is a common factor that could explain the slump in both the US and EU GDP figures since roughly 2008? Or did EU policymaking also cause the US GDP to go down?
Every conversation we've had about the EU for the last five years or so. The entire world has been talking about the relative lack of wisdom of trying to hold the entire EU to one currency for a long time, financial mismanagement, Germany strong-arming Greece into plans not good for them while Greece holds the threat of leaving over the entire EU to get better deals, and all sorts of such financial issues for a long time now. Speculations that the EU was on the path to a breakup have been rampant for years, even before immigration issues were being discussed. Only now that the breakup might actually be happening is it a total surprise to everyone.
(I'm surprised more people aren't celebrating Brexit. Before Brexit, the EU had all kinds of problems. Now suddenly they've all been solved, apparently. The selfless sacrifice of the UK should be celebrated by the EU, since apparently all the bad stuff is going to happen to the UK, alone. That's the problem with the "turn up the heat" approach to making people do things in politics; it may make people more likely to do things, but not necessarily the things you wanted.)
Before Brexit, the EU had all kinds of problems. Now suddenly they've all been solved, apparently
Of course they haven't. But they're either problems which would exist without the EU (Syrian refugees) or problems of the Eurozone (which the UK has opted out of).
Greece had the opportunity to exit and didn't. I think because they realised that, although being in debt to the EU is bad, not being able to borrow money at all is worse.
The EU is not perfect (and the Eurozone is actually quite bad), but leaving it doesn't make it go away, doesn't address the problems that the EU is supposed to address.
To me, the dead giveaway is that nobody in the UK wants to 'own' Brexit. Farage, Johnson, Gove et al have all resigned and vanished. Why is that?
So the UK economy is already completely isolated from the EU, unaffected by anything going on? Oh, well, then, an awful lot of this Brexit stuff is way less of a problem than people are claiming.
I have to say that the analysis of Brexit has been some of the worst "justifying a predetermined conclusion by hyper-local rationalizations" I've ever seen in politics, and that is saying something. You can tell something is a rationalization when it feels really satisfying, but if you try to take the rationalization out into the rest of the world it either makes no sense, or even outright contradicts the thing being rationalized. Whether Brexit is good or bad, it's going to have little to do with what I've heard from either side.
I'm not saying that countries should or should not get out of the EU.
I would just like to see some concrete evidences of Greece/Italy/Spain/Portugal on destroying German and British wealth.
You're setting a standard that can't be met by anyone. Any "concrete evidence" would have to provide concrete evidence of a hypothetical. But it isn't that bizarre of an idea that Germany could be better off if it wasn't tied to much weaker economies through a shared currency. Of course the problem here is that the situation is so large you can find not-quite-concrete evidence for almost any proposition.
Agreed, there is no "concrete evidence" and no way of supporting any of the sides. But let's just imagine for a while, what if it would be the exact same opposite?
Who helps richest countries go richer? How can a country grow if there is no decrease somewhere else? Maybe a greater profit if you don't need to pay for a different currency?
Edit: With help I mean get cheap labour, cheap goods, cheap rent and even being able to sell in that country's market and export abroad.
When is Britain loosing money?
Regarding Portugal, all I can see is a really nice investment [1] and being paid back with [2].
Which means EU lenders are actually profiting.
Saving you a click: #28 Karolinska Institute, Sweden.
Also: "The Times Higher Education (THE), formerly the Times Higher Education Supplement (THES), is a weekly magazine based in London, reporting specifically on news and issues related to higher education. It is the United Kingdom's leading publication in its field."[0]
Many things could be said about it but today is a particular bad day to talk about the "EU's retarding democracy" as we, the UK, just got a new prime minister no one voted for...
As a result of majority voters voting in favour of Brexit and to recover the democratic deficit and negotiate UK's exit from the EU a new PM has been appointed who did not support Leave. She was selected by Westminster which is largely supportive of Remain
It would be very hard not to conclude that it is actually Westminster that is retarding democracy.
I happen to agree we should have an election, but I would point out:
1) Unlike EU commissioners, people can vote Theresa May out at the next general election.
2) The UK has a parliamentary democracy. It is not a presidential system. Theresa May was elected by her constituents.
3) Of the 14 prime ministers since the end of the Second World War, half of them (including Theresa May) assumed office between elections.
Or, maybe, the only thing Brexiters know how to do with problems and responsibilities is to "exit"/run away from them? (e.g.: Johnson, Farage, Leadsom,...)
