So it would start to appear that we are not out on a limb - obviously some others are having a re-think and not standing up to the Franco-German bullying tactics.
It will be interesting to see what the next couple of weeks brings.
That Cameron took a more confrontational stance while others agreed in principle knowing that they still had the fullback position of "not getting this treaty through our parliament" is just all part of the game and mainly for domestic consumption.
Lot more cards to be played in this game of poker. Plus at some point they still need to solve the actual problem of the Euro.
An interesting perspective from the other side of the Atlantic (though I don't agree with all of it, and bear in mind that the NY Times does not represent all of US opinion - being seen as a socialist rag by many on the rabid right)
We have an electorate that doesn't undertand economics, politicians that don't understand econonomics and some economists that don't understand economics. Add in a rabid right wing press doing its nostalgic Great Britain and The Empire stuff, may I ask how on earth a referendum is going to produce a result that will be both well informed and in the interests of us & future generations?
We have an electorate that doesn't undertand economics, politicians that don't understand econonomics and some economists that don't understand economics. Add in a rabid right wing press doing its nostalgic Great Britain and The Empire stuff, may I ask how on earth a referendum is going to produce a result that will be both well informed and in the interests of us & future generations?
We have an electorate that doesn't undertand economics, politicians that don't understand econonomics and some economists that don't understand economics. Add in a rabid right wing press doing its nostalgic Great Britain and The Empire stuff, may I ask how on earth a referendum is going to produce a result that will be both well informed and in the interests of us & future generations?
Have I misunderstood or could I fairly precis this post as more EU please?
Looks like we will have to contribute £30 Bn to save Europe via the IMF
The IMF is the EU's back door. That's why they stamped their feet a month or two back to get their placeperson in, Christine Lagarde.
Cameron won't say a word about this. We'll meekly pay up.
As I've said all through this thread "Bulldog Dave" is merely this year's Christmas panto. Nothing of real substance has occurred and the man is as Europhile as Clegg in actuality.
We have an electorate that doesn't undertand economics, politicians that don't understand econonomics and some economists that don't understand economics. Add in a rabid right wing press doing its nostalgic Great Britain and The Empire stuff, may I ask how on earth a referendum is going to produce a result that will be both well informed and in the interests of us & future generations?
Have I misunderstood or could I fairly precis this post as more EU please?
No Len, you could not. My position is that I have now decided that I know enough about the EU question to decide that I don't know enough to have an informed opinion.
There's a lot of talk about more regulation to "curb the bankers etc" but, arguably and ironically, a lot of this started years ago because of the sub prime crisis in the USA which, to my simplistic mind, arose beause the US Government instructed (under duress) banks to lend to people who would not normally pass the risk criteria. .......... As I understand it events it was the other way around, with the banks and business lobby in the US who are ferocious in getting what they want, demanding less regulation and oversight. The US has had a series of scandals over the last few years - Savings and Loans in the '80s, the whi=ole junk bond thing in the late 80s, to Enron etc and now this. The problem is to get elected in the US takes billions and the only place that political candidates can get that kind of money is from big business. Naturally they expect a return on their investment. I read recently but can't at this moment find the link that the top 30 US corporations spend more PA on lobbying than they do on tax.
What brought the problem in the US to a head was Alan Greenspan slashing interest rates to virtually zero after September 11, with few people investing and incredibly cheap credit a lot of people took on board loans and mortgages which they never had a hope of re-paying once interest rates rose.
We have an electorate that doesn't undertand economics, politicians that don't understand econonomics and some economists that don't understand economics. Add in a rabid right wing press doing its nostalgic Great Britain and The Empire stuff, may I ask how on earth a referendum is going to produce a result that will be both well informed and in the interests of us & future generations?
Have I misunderstood or could I fairly precis this post as more EU please?
No Len, you could not. My position is that I have now decided that I know enough about the EU question to decide that I don't know enough to have an informed opinion.
So SA your argument is what exactly? Trust the economists to know what is best. Which economists? Which of their assessments?When the UK embarked on its stringent cutbacks most economists applauded their stance – 6 months later before the real pain of the cutbacks has even been felt – many are now reversing their view.<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />
Do you not think governments actually employ teams and teams of economists?
The last time I looked we still lived in a relative democracy – it is not perfect - far from it but to assert the population is not to be trusted with its own future is a very dangerous step. It is not going to be an easy decision and many will not even care, many more will struggle to evaluate the options but they should at least be given the chance
What next just leave the law to the police and lawyers? Or I tell you what how about leaving banking to the bankers!
That’ll work
Len I acknowledge your scepticism.It is fair comment but I think it makes my point – it really is irrelevant which politician is in situ.The Euro zone is on a precipice – if or when it falls in we will be in the middle of the fall out. I suspect either way (do you want to lose the 30bn to the WMF/ Euro zone or write it off in supporting the bank exposure to that debt) will be but a drop in the ocean. Why not at least show some good faith to your trading partners and a have a measure of value from the WMF? The scariest thing is I remain convinced no one knows what their true exposure is to any other party. There will be many an asset sitting on balance sheets which in truth will be anything but, because quite simply a bank will be holding paper from another bank which holds paper from another bank which will fail because of its exposure to toxic debt – i.e. debt that will not and cannot be repaid. Many a banker over 50 (if there are any left) will tell you they have been there before in the late 60’s and in the 80’s.Those debts were manageable because they were internal to the UK, they were modest in comparison and crucially the Bank of England maintained very strict liquidity ratios on the UK banks (and it knew what it was doing). Today we are suffering the consequences of not having had that regulatory control for the best part of 15yrs - forget the politics that was not of Cameron's doing.
There are a number of smart people on this thread, although I don't agree with some such as Len. However you also get people like Charlton hero above who come on and spout blatant untruths, then lambast everyone else for saying something different. These are the kind of people who get their "views" from the Express or Mail and there are millions of them. I regret to say my own Mum is one of them. When I was growing up my parents were typical modest Tory leaning types. Since I left, and since my Dad died in 96, my Mum has been alone with her Daily Mail. The extent to which it has polluted her opinions is truly terrifying. I worry about an EU referendum when so much of the press now is a blatant self-interested mouthpiece for it's foreign proprietors.
i wish people would support their statements, if you say the balance of trade is bad, quote figures preferably current ones, and links, otherwise you are just shouting out stuff hoping people will accept it
The Express is owned by a British porn baron. Mail is Associated Press (American). Then you have the phalanx of Murdoch papers. They are all rabidly anti - EU, as is the Telegraph. Of course Charlton hero thinks the BBC Is pro EU....
If you check, you will see that BFR and I quoted the same trade figures, and he wasn't as lazy as me, he added the link. Point taken though. Hope the Little Englanders do the same
The Express is owned by a British porn baron. Mail is Associated Press. Then you have the phalanx of Murdoch papers. They are all rabidly anti - EU, as is the Telegraph. Of course Charlton hero thinks the BBC Is pro EU....
The irony is if more of our press were (like our utlities etc) French or German owned, and not by British 'patriots', we might get a more balanced range of views about the EU!
I understand the concerns they are entirely legitimate but as we have seen with Murdoch their influence extends well beyond the general populace.It is frightening when you look at specimens like McKenzie and Morgan what the media has become but how do you lance that boil?<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />
The overhyped reaction of the UK media in recent days is a disgrace.Forget the backbench Euro Sceptics what do you think the media reaction will have been if Cameron had signed the new treaty.You know it.Cameron betrays Britain! Cameron betrays the electorate! Cameron betrays democracy! Cameron the lapdog of Europe! 500k jobs to go! City prepares for exodus from UK?
As Peanuts suggests I do not believe there is a win here just the choice of the more palatable option. Currently whichever direction the government moves the media can righteously play the “disgusted of Tunbridge Wells” card. The media cannot lose.The only way to put them in their place them is to secure an unequivocal commitment from the British people that they do wish to be part of Europe.
It cannot be beyond the wit of those who wish to play a full part in Europe to facilitate its own media push by whatever mechanism that is available.The UK cannot keep hedging its bet.
France, Germany, and Spain are the big noises in the EU.
They have been using their veto for many years with total disregard for the UK position.
As was said on here, this is like being forced onto the Titanic instead of staying on a floating iceberg. Cameron was right to put Britain first.
A few weeks back, Sarkozy told us to keep our views to ourselves while they sorted it out - but the truth is that only Germany has any money and all the other states either owe money or are owed money by bankrupt member states.
China is sitting waiting in the wings, having propped up the Euro exchange rate for a decade (remember when it was 1.45 to the £ ?) and keeping it at a ridiculous 1.15 when it is in total crisis. China is waiting to hold Europe to ransom in the same way OPEC did in the 1970's, by buying and hoarding natural resources and commodities.
Stay out of the Euro, let them talk it out themselves without inflicting any more nonsense regulations on the UK.
Buy British, and let's get insular for 5 - 10 years just like France has done since the banking crisis started in 2008. If people don't want to trade with us - then so what ? they don't have the money to pay the bill anyway !
Christ, chill out Prague Addick we're all entitled to an opinion. We'll see what happens, but for the record I back Camerons decision. (and no, I didn't vote Tory).
Self interest self interest self interest and when that fails more self interest. This is the cornerstone of every countries involvement in the Eurozone and is also why it is and always will be a flawed concept. Let me get this straight, we were in but really outside. Now we are out but will still have to pay to be in. Farce. Not sure how it will all shake out but I know I wont be worrying or pontifcating on here over it, you see I have my own self interest in mind. Now where is that bottle opener ?
I said in one of my early contributions that the British people are Euro sceptics by nature and each Government of both political persuasions has talked this talk whilst moving us in the opposite direction towards integration.
The United Kingdom have been cautious from the word go about Europe . The EEC was created in 1957 by the Treaty of Rome and we didn't sign up until 1973 a full 16 years later . Some believe we have never properly caught up others that we should never have signed up at all .
My view is we are now tied into Europe economically over nearly 40 years and our problem is Britain's reliance on financial services which have gradually destroyed our manufacuring base .In contrast I understand that Germany still actually exports goods and services to the Asian market .This is deeply ironic considering given that we were once the 'Workshop of the World ' a hundred years ago.
This is deeply ironic considering given that we were once the 'Workshop of the World ' a hundred years ago.
Since then, we've fought two wars, virtually standing on our own to protect Europe from federal control in two of it's guises - not only was this a massive drain on our economy, for which we still haven't recovered, but along comes the US and pumps billions of dollars into rebuilding Germany and giving their manufactiring industries a massive head start on us.
The French are whoring themselves to the Germans to ensure they're on the same side this time incase it kicks off again.
The rest of them are up shit creek without a paddle and rely heavily on massive subsistence from the 'big boys' to support their crumbling economies,
All these doom and gloom merchants - ''oh woh is me, no one will deal with us ever again'' are just scaremongering. They have no idea about what will happen.
Countries will trade with us - they have to, they have no other option. Remove the British market and sales of BMW reduce by 15%. Without us drinking European wine, the wine lakes will become wine seas. All and everything produced in Europe is or can be produced (or faked) elsewhere in the World.
We can do without Europe more than Europe can do without us.
Little Englander? My arse. The retort of a person who can't defend their corner. The same people coming out with this phrase are the one's who scream 'racists' at every opportunity, or 'Daily Mail' reader or 'Tory' as if it's some kind of slur. It's pathetic really.
As for Prague accusing his mother of having no mind of her own, or her ability to decide what she believes is best for her in her own country - you should be ashamed of yourself. At least she is here contributing, not out of the country pontificating
"As for Prague accusing his mother of having no mind of her own, or her ability to decide what she believes is best for her in her own country - you should be ashamed of yourself. At least she is here contributing, not out of the country pontificating"
Yeah well, I've had that discussion with her enough times. Actually every time I see the bloody rag, I ask her if the 'tidal wave of Czech Gypsies" which the Mail predicted in one of its made -up 'exposes' would overrun the country after their accession in 2004, has arrived yet. What I find distressing is that she was never like this in the past. She's full of suspicion and fear of foreigners now, yet she has two in-law children who are themselves foreigners or from a foreign family, meaning she has grandchildren who are mixed race. And for your information, I'm both a UK voter and UK corporate and personal taxpayer. And if you want to pontificate in person, you'll find me on the Well Hall coach to Yeovil :-)
'The last time I looked we still lived in a relative democracy – it is not perfect - far from it but to assert the population is not to be trusted with its own future is a very dangerous step. It is not going to be an easy decision and many will not even care, many more will struggle to evaluate the options but they should at least be given the chance '
Ah, the politicians applause gatherer! Bit of a cheap one Grapevine. I do not think that at any stage I have suggested that the population is not to be trusted, more that the press and politicians are limiting the debate, quite deliberately evading key issues and not presenting the information to the population in a way that can be considered neutral and helpful. Hopefully we may agree that democracy requires an informed electorate, but IMO the politicians and right wing press are denying us that. I am asking precisely that we are given the chance to be informed and to decide our own future.
My father was a member of the British Communist Party in the 1950s after seeing what fascism could do.
The older he got the less left wing he got and the older he got the more right wing he got. In his old age he became concerned for himself and his family. He had suspicion of foreigners - to be honest he was suspicious of just about everybody.
But that was his choice, his decision, his conclusion. Not one formed by newspapers or the media or his friends or his family. It was his opinion and he was entitled to it.
And that Prague is what democracy is about.
I would never try to force my parents into my beliefs just as they would never have done the same to me. Educate yes, indoctirnate, never.
I won't be taking the Well Hall coach though, as after I've visited IKEA, I will be driven in my BMW to a nice little Italian restaurant in Greenwich, where I shall have some pasta, washed down with some Spanish Rioja. Then I will move onto an Irish pub for a couple of pints of Czech lager and some olives before going onto the match ;-)
Interesting argument this. A bit pointless, like, since any way you slice it, we're all totally and completely fucked beyond all repair... but interesting nonetheless.
Cheap shot? I am afraid you have lost me. I thought you firstly were arguing because noone understood economics how could the electorate make an informed judgement. You now clarify your argument to say the electorate will not be able to make an informed judgement because the information upon which they will base their opinion is unduly influenced by politicians and the right wing press.
In both scenarios I can only (rightly or wrongly) draw an inference the opinion expressed by the electorate is based on either limited understanding or misleading information and not therefore to be trusted and to all intents and purposes valueless.
What do you propose as an alternative? You seem to offer none.
Your argument could just as easily apply to any democratically selected government ever elected. There have been vested interests promoting their view of the world no doubt since mankind could speak.
I would suggest however there are more channels of communication for the dissemination of informed opinion than ever before. Indeed if you evaluate the election of Obama he probably secured not only the popular vote but much of his campaign funding via social media channels.
It is within the remit of pro and anti European groups to do the same.
Comments
That Cameron took a more confrontational stance while others agreed in principle knowing that they still had the fullback position of "not getting this treaty through our parliament" is just all part of the game and mainly for domestic consumption.
Lot more cards to be played in this game of poker. Plus at some point they still need to solve the actual problem of the Euro.
An interesting perspective from the other side of the Atlantic (though I don't agree with all of it, and bear in mind that the NY Times does not represent all of US opinion - being seen as a socialist rag by many on the rabid right)
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/13/opinion/cohen-the-british-euro-farce.html<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />
We have an electorate that doesn't undertand economics, politicians that don't understand econonomics and some economists that don't understand economics. Add in a rabid right wing press doing its nostalgic Great Britain and The Empire stuff, may I ask how on earth a referendum is going to produce a result that will be both well informed and in the interests of us & future generations?
The IMF is the EU's back door. That's why they stamped their feet a month or two back to get their placeperson in, Christine Lagarde.
Cameron won't say a word about this. We'll meekly pay up.
As I've said all through this thread "Bulldog Dave" is merely this year's Christmas panto. Nothing of real substance has occurred and the man is as Europhile as Clegg in actuality.
More's the pity.
http://www.prmia.org/pdf/Case_Studies/Fannie_Mae_and_Freddie_Mac_090911_v2.pdf
Bottom of page 1 refers to political pressure from the Clinton administration and on.
So SA your argument is what exactly? Trust the economists to know what is best. Which economists? Which of their assessments? When the UK embarked on its stringent cutbacks most economists applauded their stance – 6 months later before the real pain of the cutbacks has even been felt – many are now reversing their view.<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />
Do you not think governments actually employ teams and teams of economists?
The last time I looked we still lived in a relative democracy – it is not perfect - far from it but to assert the population is not to be trusted with its own future is a very dangerous step. It is not going to be an easy decision and many will not even care, many more will struggle to evaluate the options but they should at least be given the chance
What next just leave the law to the police and lawyers? Or I tell you what how about leaving banking to the bankers!
That’ll work
Len I acknowledge your scepticism. It is fair comment but I think it makes my point – it really is irrelevant which politician is in situ. The Euro zone is on a precipice – if or when it falls in we will be in the middle of the fall out.
I suspect either way (do you want to lose the 30bn to the WMF/ Euro zone or write it off in supporting the bank exposure to that debt) will be but a drop in the ocean. Why not at least show some good faith to your trading partners and a have a measure of value from the WMF?
The scariest thing is I remain convinced no one knows what their true exposure is to any other party.
There will be many an asset sitting on balance sheets which in truth will be anything but, because quite simply a bank will be holding paper from another bank which holds paper from another bank which will fail because of its exposure to toxic debt – i.e. debt that will not and cannot be repaid.
Many a banker over 50 (if there are any left) will tell you they have been there before in the late 60’s and in the 80’s. Those debts were manageable because they were internal to the UK, they were modest in comparison and crucially the Bank of England maintained very strict liquidity ratios on the UK banks (and it knew what it was doing).
Today we are suffering the consequences of not having had that regulatory control for the best part of 15yrs - forget the politics that was not of Cameron's doing.
Grapevine49
a) On the edge
b) In the shit
c) On our own
d) On one leg
e) On our own two feet
f) Away end, restricted view (eg, behind pylon at old den)
There are a number of smart people on this thread, although I don't agree with some such as Len. However you also get people like Charlton hero above who come on and spout blatant untruths, then lambast everyone else for saying something different. These are the kind of people who get their "views" from the Express or Mail and there are millions of them. I regret to say my own Mum is one of them. When I was growing up my parents were typical modest Tory leaning types. Since I left, and since my Dad died in 96, my Mum has been alone with her Daily Mail. The extent to which it has polluted her opinions is truly terrifying. I worry about an EU referendum when so much of the press now is a blatant self-interested mouthpiece for it's foreign proprietors.
I'm no lover of the Express or Mail, but they're not foreign-owned are they?
If you check, you will see that BFR and I quoted the same trade figures, and he wasn't as lazy as me, he added the link. Point taken though. Hope the Little Englanders do the same
Was sent this at the time it all hit the fan and the stick-men still give the best explanation of sub-prime I have seen.
http://bigpicture.typepad.com/comments/2008/02/how-subprime-re.html
Prague
I understand the concerns they are entirely legitimate but as we have seen with Murdoch their influence extends well beyond the general populace. It is frightening when you look at specimens like McKenzie and Morgan what the media has become but how do you lance that boil?<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />
The overhyped reaction of the UK media in recent days is a disgrace. Forget the backbench Euro Sceptics what do you think the media reaction will have been if Cameron had signed the new treaty. You know it. Cameron betrays Britain! Cameron betrays the electorate! Cameron betrays democracy! Cameron the lapdog of Europe! 500k jobs to go! City prepares for exodus from UK?
As Peanuts suggests I do not believe there is a win here just the choice of the more palatable option. Currently whichever direction the government moves the media can righteously play the “disgusted of Tunbridge Wells” card. The media cannot lose. The only way to put them in their place them is to secure an unequivocal commitment from the British people that they do wish to be part of Europe.
It cannot be beyond the wit of those who wish to play a full part in Europe to facilitate its own media push by whatever mechanism that is available. The UK cannot keep hedging its bet.
Mind you I have just read the Farage thread!!
Grapevine 49
Self interest self interest self interest and when that fails more self interest. This is the cornerstone of every countries involvement in the Eurozone and is also why it is and always will be a flawed concept. Let me get this straight, we were in but really outside. Now we are out but will still have to pay to be in. Farce. Not sure how it will all shake out but I know I wont be worrying or pontifcating on here over it, you see I have my own self interest in mind. Now where is that bottle opener ?
I said in one of my early contributions that the British people are Euro sceptics by nature and each Government of both political persuasions has talked this talk whilst moving us in the opposite direction towards integration.
The United Kingdom have been cautious from the word go about Europe . The EEC was created in 1957 by the Treaty of Rome and we didn't sign up until 1973 a full 16 years later . Some believe we have never properly caught up others that we should never have signed up at all .
My view is we are now tied into Europe economically over nearly 40 years and our problem is Britain's reliance on financial services which have gradually destroyed our manufacuring base .In contrast I understand that Germany still actually exports goods and services to the Asian market .This is deeply ironic considering given that we were once the 'Workshop of the World ' a hundred years ago.
Since then, we've fought two wars, virtually standing on our own to protect Europe from federal control in two of it's guises - not only was this a massive drain on our economy, for which we still haven't recovered, but along comes the US and pumps billions of dollars into rebuilding Germany and giving their manufactiring industries a massive head start on us.
The French are whoring themselves to the Germans to ensure they're on the same side this time incase it kicks off again.
The rest of them are up shit creek without a paddle and rely heavily on massive subsistence from the 'big boys' to support their crumbling economies,
All these doom and gloom merchants - ''oh woh is me, no one will deal with us ever again'' are just scaremongering. They have no idea about what will happen.
Countries will trade with us - they have to, they have no other option. Remove the British market and sales of BMW reduce by 15%. Without us drinking European wine, the wine lakes will become wine seas. All and everything produced in Europe is or can be produced (or faked) elsewhere in the World.
We can do without Europe more than Europe can do without us.
Little Englander? My arse. The retort of a person who can't defend their corner. The same people coming out with this phrase are the one's who scream 'racists' at every opportunity, or 'Daily Mail' reader or 'Tory' as if it's some kind of slur. It's pathetic really.
As for Prague accusing his mother of having no mind of her own, or her ability to decide what she believes is best for her in her own country - you should be ashamed of yourself. At least she is here contributing, not out of the country pontificating
'The last time I looked we still lived in a relative democracy – it is not perfect - far from it but to assert the population is not to be trusted with its own future is a very dangerous step. It is not going to be an easy decision and many will not even care, many more will struggle to evaluate the options but they should at least be given the chance '
Ah, the politicians applause gatherer! Bit of a cheap one Grapevine. I do not think that at any stage I have suggested that the population is not to be trusted, more that the press and politicians are limiting the debate, quite deliberately evading key issues and not presenting the information to the population in a way that can be considered neutral and helpful. Hopefully we may agree that democracy requires an informed electorate, but IMO the politicians and right wing press are denying us that. I am asking precisely that we are given the chance to be informed and to decide our own future.
My father was a member of the British Communist Party in the 1950s after seeing what fascism could do.
The older he got the less left wing he got and the older he got the more right wing he got. In his old age he became concerned for himself and his family. He had suspicion of foreigners - to be honest he was suspicious of just about everybody.
But that was his choice, his decision, his conclusion. Not one formed by newspapers or the media or his friends or his family. It was his opinion and he was entitled to it.
And that Prague is what democracy is about.
I would never try to force my parents into my beliefs just as they would never have done the same to me. Educate yes, indoctirnate, never.
I won't be taking the Well Hall coach though, as after I've visited IKEA, I will be driven in my BMW to a nice little Italian restaurant in Greenwich, where I shall have some pasta, washed down with some Spanish Rioja. Then I will move onto an Irish pub for a couple of pints of Czech lager and some olives before going onto the match ;-)
SA
Cheap shot? I am afraid you have lost me. I thought you firstly were arguing because noone understood economics how could the electorate make an informed judgement. You now clarify your argument to say the electorate will not be able to make an informed judgement because the information upon which they will base their opinion is unduly influenced by politicians and the right wing press.
In both scenarios I can only (rightly or wrongly) draw an inference the opinion expressed by the electorate is based on either limited understanding or misleading information and not therefore to be trusted and to all intents and purposes valueless.
What do you propose as an alternative? You seem to offer none.
Your argument could just as easily apply to any democratically selected government ever elected. There have been vested interests promoting their view of the world no doubt since mankind could speak.
I would suggest however there are more channels of communication for the dissemination of informed opinion than ever before. Indeed if you evaluate the election of Obama he probably secured not only the popular vote but much of his campaign funding via social media channels.
It is within the remit of pro and anti European groups to do the same.
Grapevine49