If UK leaves the EU.

Discussion in 'Western Europe' started by william walker, Oct 21, 2014.

  1. william walker

    william walker New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2012
    Messages:
    1,289
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    0
    If Britain leaves the EU what would the overall economic and political effect be?

    It seems to me that it all depends what the UK and rest of the EU do if the UK leaves.

    The UK could embark on the correct competitive free trade based reforms of its economy with deregulation, repeal EU directives and treaties, stop EU programs, allow more fishing and energy exploration. This could mean tax cuts, a simpler tax code, cutting and removal of tariffs on trade, plus free movement of people from the world not just the EU. This would make the UK ultra competitive against the EU and would cause problems between the UK taking capital and labor out of the EU, leading the EU to take short term punitive protectionist actions against Britain forcing a trade war and military conflict. The winner of which would dominate Europe. Strange as it may seem Britain would likely win such a war if it went military.

    The other option is the UK leaves the EU but keeps everything basically the way it is now just within influence within the EU. This would be the best outcome for the EU and terrible for Britain economically and politically, however it would be the least risky outcome for politicians, intellectuals and the civil service.

    Or the more likely constrained outcome which is the UK does some reforms, has trade deals with the EU, is part of the Europeans economic area in a Norway and Switzerland style model.

    I personally would support the first option and coordinate it with governmental, cultural and military improvements over a 10 year period. With the intent of fighting a conflict to break apart the EU which would mean a need for allies in such and undertaking.

    I think the UK would seek reforms and opt-outs within the European Court of Human Rights, however would remain a part of it. The UK Parliament would likely repeal the EU treaties so would repeal the EU Fundamental Rights Charter, then either return to the English bill of Rights or create its own things.

    Given the likely outcome of leaving the EU, it isn't clear cut that leave is the best option in my mind. Sure Norway and Switzerland have good GDP's but there economies aren't very good or competitive overall because they are constrained by the EU in part. UK however is a different matter it has the best economy in Europe if the right reforms are undertaken, it has a huge population, can have economic domination over Ireland went it is outside the EU. Basically the UK becomes much bigger within Europe outside the Franco-German dominated EU. Unfortunately for the UK its economic is interlined within the EU bureaucracy, companies trade is based upon this and leaving will affect trade and their for productive growth. Plus this current reliance means the EU has manipulation over the UK given its size.
     
  2. AlpinLuke

    AlpinLuke Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2014
    Messages:
    6,559
    Likes Received:
    588
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    It's difficult to say.

    If we consider the direction that EU is taking, overall from the adoption of the EURO as general currency unit, we can note that two areas have been delimited. The core of EU, substantially continental Europe corresponding with the so called "EURO zone", that is to say the countries who have adopted €; and an other wider zone, which we could call the "European outskirts" where UK is.

    UK doesn't want a deeper integration and this could become a trouble in the long term for the new EU axis [Paris - Berlin], so that I guess that in the two main EU capitals there is who even hopes that UK leaves the Union [substantially in financial environments there are establishments seeing UK as an annoying partner ... "better to lose it than to find it", I could say translating an Italian say].

    In any case, despite the historical mistrust between Italy and England, I think that for Italy the permanence of UK in the union would be an asset, just as counterweight for the new axis Paris - Berlin. Italy risks to become a kind of Mediterranean slave of the two centers of power. UK could grant a good equilibrium, breaking any acceleration towards a concentration of power into federal authorities with doubtful legitimation ...

    If UK leaves, EURO zone will become a French-German domain, no doubt about this.
    [To say all, it's not impossible that other EU members could follow UK ...].
     
  3. mihapiha

    mihapiha Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2012
    Messages:
    998
    Likes Received:
    26
    Trophy Points:
    28
    The effects on the EU would probably be quite mild considering. The UK is not part of the Schengen Area and neither do they use the Euro. Also the UK is geographically isolated, and her ports have little effect on areas outside the UK. The economy of the EU and the UK would probably crash for a few years but bounce back eventually. I think it might be the lesser evil for the EU than for the UK.

    The prices in the UK would go up by 10% or maybe even 20% on food, because the UK can't supply herself with food depending on how much they'd make customs, and the exports would reduce to a degree. Right now the UK doesn't pay customs on most imported food because it's produced in EU territory. Companies like Vodafone, Rover, and other British companies who rely on foreign markets would suffer obviously, because British products would have customs for us, making them more expensive than the competition. For companies with high activities abroad it definitely would be quite a blow. And in the case of Vodafone, it would be interesting to see how laws apply. I don't know if a foreign company can own the telecom network. So the changes in laws and regulation, because companies would be considered foreign, could really hurt some companies to an unknown extent.

    But I think the British people and her politicians want to leave the EU longterm anyhow. So this is unavoidable. The problem is the current recession, which does have a negative effect on the UK although most people don't feel it right now. Britain leaving the EU would definitely be bad until British companies can establish a market outside continental Europe, because continental Europe will reduce trading with the UK if they leave the EU. This reduction of the market has to be replaced elsewhere. And I would imagine that Britain would suffer for 10 years, before restoring her economic position.

    So if they do go out, it will probably be an economic problem for the foreseeable future for the UK, because companies would loose the market which is worth 440 million people. These 440 million would then be foreign, and the trading agreements to each individual country could have consequences. So if UK's representatives want to leave the EU, it would be good for them to have a trading agreement of some sort which creates as few economic changes as possible. But maybe the politicians know that this a big problem for their people economically if they leave...
     
  4. mihapiha

    mihapiha Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2012
    Messages:
    998
    Likes Received:
    26
    Trophy Points:
    28
    I think you're absolutely right, but I am not convinced that Paris-Berlin rule over us has too many negative consequences. Austria has been following the German policies for decades and Slovenia has followed Austrian policies since their independence. I imagine that the north of Italy would economically do very well as well, because of the long history with either France or Austria. I can imagine that especially the people in Italy don't like the idea (because they want to run their own country), but in the end I personally don't care if it someone from Rome or Stockholm who runs the EU, as long as they do a good job.

    I think there will be countries clearly left out of the loop: Spain, Portugal, Greece, the southern part of Italy, Rumania, Bulgaria, and maybe the Baltic countries. The question is what solution the EU will find for them. You can't just ignore the needs of over 100 million of your citizens...
     
  5. Pro-Consul

    Pro-Consul Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2012
    Messages:
    1,965
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I don't think that it would come to war but it wouldn't be feasible anyway because still have the best navy in Europe.

    I disagree with some items of the EU human rights and I don't believe that we needed it in the beginning.

    I believe that we should leave the EU as it would free up our ability to trade with the rest of the world and we also have the commonwealth which could help with our trading and political relations across the globe.

    We would free ourselves of EU bureaucracy as well as around 5% of the annual budget not to mention avoid being a part of a growing and potentially dangerous united foreign policy.

    Britain would still have the option to continue trading with Europe and at a tariff that we could negotiate for.
    A Britain that is not part of the EU would be economically stronger and would also benefit Europe politically as well owing to the historic counterbalance that Britain has provided.
     
  6. AlpinLuke

    AlpinLuke Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2014
    Messages:
    6,559
    Likes Received:
    588
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    What you are describing as a possible future scenario for Europe is what in Italy we call "Europa a due velocità" [two velocities Europe], that is to say a Union with a central area which would become the locomotive of the continent and slower outskirts which could risk to remain quite "backwards".

    Northern Italy is among the most productive and rich areas of Europe [with German Ruhr and the English area centered on London], considering it in its entirety it's the richest, to be accurate. So that, it's obvious that any possible continental leadership will want to have Turin and Milan with it [not to forget Venice].

    And from our perspective [I'm a real "Northern Italian", so Northern that I'm almost Swiss ... it's a matter of 20km ...] it's a possibility, but this would mean to become a satellite of the mentioned axis [Paris - Berlin].

    Next EXPO will be just in Milan and the city is growing to present itself as a reference for the Mediterranean region [also on the other side of the sea ... Northern Africa], but unfortunately [this is Italy!] the government has decided to downgrade the main airport of the city [Malpensa - MPX], so now the main international airport of Italy is Rome. We could think this is natural [Rome is the capital], but no, like in US the airport of Washington is not the most important of the country, in Italy, if we follow economical and social dynamics, our main airport has to be Malpensa - MPX - Milan. Not Rome.

    But politicians ...
     
  7. Vlad Ivx

    Vlad Ivx Active Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2012
    Messages:
    1,087
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    38
    The southern part of Italy? You can forget it. Dividing a country into regions because of their economic power is not for this century. Your Germans didn't like it when they were divided into 'east' and 'west', did they? Why would the Italians do something like that? The EU won't do it. No European would accept that. It would fade much of the EU credibility.

    Look at how NATO and Merkel fought for every patch of land in Ukraine and risked staring a world war possibly. And Ukraine's history is not as intertwined with Central Europe as that of Italy. Nowadays land is precious. Leaving regions 'out of the loop' just because they are not developed would leave them vulnerable to annexations, to attacks from entities like the Islamic State etc. What if one day ISIL or sympathizers will subdue the Northern African states? The next step would be firing missiles into Southern Italy. And then the so called developed northern allies would pose as S Italy's protector, which would really make them feel like a buffer zone of slaves, as AlpinLuke puts it, sending them weapons like they send to the Kurds but without public finance from Rome or Brussels. More than pathetic.

    Dividing a country is the worst thing you can do. Before the breakup many would flock to the north, leaving the weak, the poor, the conquerable behind. The plummeting economy of an already weak region would force the creation of a true physical border between the north and the south and will leave the door open for opportunistic aggressors to make a move on that southern territory. If not, then the mafias will thrive. It might become something like a European Colombia or Mexico out of Southern Italy in the best case. Or worse... It might have to struggle to repel Sharia law. Having such neighbors next to a thriving European federal state isn't quite an option. It simply isn't feasible, nor would it be to its advantage. Divisions are not for this century.
     
  8. munter

    munter New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2014
    Messages:
    3,894
    Likes Received:
    11
    Trophy Points:
    0
    UK should leave the EU, and regain its sovereignty!
     
  9. AboveAlpha

    AboveAlpha Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2013
    Messages:
    30,284
    Likes Received:
    612
    Trophy Points:
    83
    The U.K. is really not a true member of the E.U. as it did not adopt the Euro and for good reason.

    The U.K. is much more aligned both Politically and Economically with the U.S. than with the E.U. and after witnessing the DEBACLE that is how France and Germany have handled the Greek Economic issues....the U.K. is very pleased it did not adopt the Euro.

    AboveAlpha
     
  10. william walker

    william walker New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2012
    Messages:
    1,289
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The problem is that Northern Italy the Po river valley and Alpine Italy is connected to France and Germany through land. So it is able to be at the heart of the European economy. However Central Italy, Southern Italy and the two Islands are Mediterranean so they are linked within the Mediterranean sea. Basically the North is land based, the rest is naval bases. Spain is hampered by the Pyrenees making it harder to connect with the rest of the EU economy outside the Mediterranean and Iberian peninsula. Indeed the greatest benefit to Spain and Portugal from the EU is that it links them together which hasn't happen for 550 years.

    - - - Updated - - -

    The problem is that Northern Italy the Po river valley and Alpine Italy is connected to France and Germany through land. So it is able to be at the heart of the European economy. However Central Italy, Southern Italy and the two Islands are Mediterranean so they are linked within the Mediterranean sea. Basically the North is land based, the rest is naval bases. Spain is hampered by the Pyrenees making it harder to connect with the rest of the EU economy outside the Mediterranean and Iberian peninsula. Indeed the greatest benefit to Spain and Portugal from the EU is that it links them together which hasn't happen for 550 years.

    - - - Updated - - -

    The problem is that Northern Italy the Po river valley and Alpine Italy is connected to France and Germany through land. So it is able to be at the heart of the European economy. However Central Italy, Southern Italy and the two Islands are Mediterranean so they are linked within the Mediterranean sea. Basically the North is land based, the rest is naval bases. Spain is hampered by the Pyrenees making it harder to connect with the rest of the EU economy outside the Mediterranean and Iberian peninsula. Indeed the greatest benefit to Spain and Portugal from the EU is that it links them together which hasn't happen for 550 years.

    - - - Updated - - -

    The problem is that Northern Italy the Po river valley and Alpine Italy is connected to France and Germany through land. So it is able to be at the heart of the European economy. However Central Italy, Southern Italy and the two Islands are Mediterranean so they are linked within the Mediterranean sea. Basically the North is land based, the rest is naval bases. Spain is hampered by the Pyrenees making it harder to connect with the rest of the EU economy outside the Mediterranean and Iberian peninsula. Indeed the greatest benefit to Spain and Portugal from the EU is that it links them together which hasn't happen for 550 years.
     
  11. AboveAlpha

    AboveAlpha Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2013
    Messages:
    30,284
    Likes Received:
    612
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Lack of connnections both cultural and economic within the E.U. cannot be blamed on geography as these issues exist due to centuries old hatreds and suspicions.

    We have massive mountains and rivers and distances between states in the U.S....and we have Alaska and Hawaii not even close to the other 48 continental states.....but each U.S. State still has a high level of interstate travel and commerce.

    In Europe....old hatreds hand on.

    AboveAlpha
     
  12. william walker

    william walker New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2012
    Messages:
    1,289
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    0
    It is geopolitical in Europe. So culture, history and geography. However even within the US you have a massive difference between the Southern states, east 13 colonies, the Rocky mountains and west coast. The US river network connects the North and South with the Rockies allowing trade all around the US. The east cost is basically self sufficient and able to trade within the Pacific less connected to the rest of the US. However US state based system allows this to be the case. As the US governmental system becomes ever more centralised it will cause economic problems within the US, plus the growing Spanish population.
     
  13. AboveAlpha

    AboveAlpha Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2013
    Messages:
    30,284
    Likes Received:
    612
    Trophy Points:
    83
    I disagree and Historically those people who come to the U.S. are the most staunch defenders and participents within the Nation.

    I go to Europe often and I have been to every European Nation.

    There is a concept of Aristocracy that exists in Europe to this day and people still brag about somewhere in their ancestoral family there existed royalty.

    The concept of Royalty makes an American sick.

    The U.S. has it's issues but all 50 states are one Nation.

    The E.U. will never achieve this concept.

    AboveAlpha
     
  14. AboveAlpha

    AboveAlpha Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2013
    Messages:
    30,284
    Likes Received:
    612
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Just to add....there are thousands upon thousands of passenger Jet Liners traveling daily to every state in the U.S.

    Add to this our massive Interstate Highway System and Hundreds of Thousands of 18 wheelers as well as Freight Trains....there is nowhere in the United States that goods cannot be destributed to.

    AboveAlpha
     
  15. william walker

    william walker New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2012
    Messages:
    1,289
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I can't speak about the rest of Europe. Just about Britain. In Britain we had the Glorious Revolution which curtailed the influence of the Monarchy and aristocracy, while keeping them power and influence to block the House of Commons. You need to get the idea of Royalty out of your head, the Monarchy in Britain is an institution the Royal part doesn't exist anymore and hasn't done so since the Glorious Revolution.

    Also not everybody in the US see's it as one nation which is why you fought a civil war which was basically the 13 colonies asserting domination over the South.
     
  16. AlpinLuke

    AlpinLuke Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2014
    Messages:
    6,559
    Likes Received:
    588
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I was following the proposed hypothesis for seek of discussion.

    The division of Italy is impossible, first of all because the cultural / social center of Italy is still the traditional Catholic Church [and it is at Rome, not at Milan ...], then there is also a heavy economical argument. One of the reason why the great powers [of course Austria a part] didn't oppose the creation of an unified Italy was the possibility to erase all those borderlines, customs, delays ... in making goods traveling towards south to sail to towards Eastern Mediterranean [with Suez canal coming the unification of Italy was also even an economical priority].

    Italy will remain unified, what we have still to understand is if it will stay with the new "central powers", at the end we were one of the 3 central powers who created CECA [Italy, France, Germany] in the 50's ...
     
  17. mihapiha

    mihapiha Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2012
    Messages:
    998
    Likes Received:
    26
    Trophy Points:
    28
    You could choose to look at it this way: If the EU finally becomes one country, which might happen sooner with the UK leaving because Paris-Berlin will take over and move faster forward, Paris-Berlin will loose it's dominant position. It will depend who's sitting in Brussels. So maybe the Paris-Berlin axis as you called it, is the necessary step we are still missing, to give us finally a vote. I'm in Austria, so I don't think any of our leaders get to talk in EU policies anyway. So I would love it if the EU finally would move forward and we could elect people to Brussels who have something to say. Just like you I'm looking at Holland-Merkel, whom I didn't elect...

    The separation between east and west Germany happened due to ideological reasons. The EU on the other hand is a unity primarily for economic reasons. You can see that in your country as well. As soon as someone graduates from college, they then choose not to remain in Romania, but often go to western countries to increase their income. This is catastrophic for the state, which invested a fortune into someone's education. No matter how much money you get from the EU, you still loose primarily the most qualified people to other European countries, which in return don't send any back. That's one of the reasons the economic growth in Romania and other countries has not been as successful as many hoped.

    The EU is not a military alliance, NATO is. So what happens outside of the EU doesn't really matter, since we have not agreed to join up militarily in anything yet. Usually the big three (Germany, France and UK) don't agree on military measures. There is no EU military, so what happens in the Ukraine is a problem for the big countries, who choose to intervene in some way.

    The separation here is economic. Northern Italy is rich and highly developed, the South is not. The same is true in other areas, but we (as in the EU) tried to help those regions with money. The EU sends aid into many countries or regions who don't have to send any of it back, yet the regions still have not recovered or become competitive. The only thing I mentioned was the second solution which is debated: give the economic stable countries the Euro, and give the unstable countries the opportunity to go back to another currency. But I am not convinced that this economic measure is good for people outside the economic stable countries. Italy is one of the few economically separated countries. But the EU still wouldn't want to give up areas like Greece or Sicily. So it's not a political separation. The question is only, how could we make the Euro and the Eurozone stable and how could we help the countries Spain, Portugal, southern Italy and Greece (primarily because they use the Euro already) as well as Rumania, Bulgaria, etc. without them hurting the Eurozone. How can we make Bukarest as productive economically as Vienna or Hamburg is? (I chose cities with similar inhabitant numbers)

    So you completely missed the point of what the debate was, or what I was talking about really. Maybe I was not clear...
     
  18. Vlad Ivx

    Vlad Ivx Active Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2012
    Messages:
    1,087
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    38
    And you think Stalin and Roosevelt kept in mind none of the economic potential of German regions whatsoever?

    But causing poverty to flourish in the south of Italy might lead to unrest of many sorts there, threatening the rest of the EU itself. Actually it does because leaving the south of Italy out of the EU might collapse that region to a point where it would become a very bad neighbor.

    This applies primarily to medics. Other than that, people who graduate here remain here. When it comes to immigration for the long term, we're either talking about highly qualified people (medics, surgeons, scientist, engineers) or poor people. Those who want to work abroad will also go to university abroad. Many choose to return after 6-12 months. Wage is higher but so are taxes.

    Yes, true. Education here is free and universities meet US-EU standards.

    Actually we never used more EU money than we contributed with. The total amount of EU funds of all kinds ever used by Romania does not near the amount we put into the EU budget. Romania is notorious for largely not using the EU funds. These funds are important for development only to a limited extent. More than money, we need reforms which are already underway. Money is not so much the problem, but diverting the money this country already produces to the right institutions by tackling corruption. Taxes, tax evasion etc. The current president is finally going to leave. His term ends.

    Up until the economic crisis of 2009 our GDP kept doubling every two years. Even income was increased by 40%.

    Economic separation soon leads to separation of all kinds. That's why it's a bad idea.

    You must be joking. It would be the end of the Euro.

    The thing is... it doesn't work like that.

    The solution is to wait. There is no need for such active involvement. In time they will do by themselves. The process is slow but these countries are bound to reach the same per capita gdp as in western Europe or better.

    They will by themselves. If you look at the graphs of the last two decades you can see the future decades. The thing is, we are struggling to adopt administrative and fiscal reforms that would divert billions from the black markets to the right authorities.

    I think you should work more at opening up a bit and checking out a few snapshots into the future.
     
  19. Pro-Consul

    Pro-Consul Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2012
    Messages:
    1,965
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Not really. And nobody brags about regal relations it's just a point of interest.
    Can't see why.
    That's because comparatively less people want to have such a union which is evolving; unfortunately.
     
  20. martin76

    martin76 New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2013
    Messages:
    551
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
     
  21. AboveAlpha

    AboveAlpha Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2013
    Messages:
    30,284
    Likes Received:
    612
    Trophy Points:
    83
    LOL!

    I enjoy the U.K.very much and people there are always very nice to me...overly polite.

    I am aware about the realities of the U.K. Government.

    As for our Civil War....it ended what? In 1865 I think?

    We are very much one Nation.

    AboveAlpha
     
  22. AlpinLuke

    AlpinLuke Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2014
    Messages:
    6,559
    Likes Received:
    588
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    It seems that between UK and Italy there is something going on [and this is surprising, but overall amusing, thinking to how in Berlin and Paris they will consider this]. Prime Minister Cameron has quoted Renzi with his "lethal weapon" referred to EU rules and further requests of contributions to some [only some] members of the union. Cameron & Renzi ... UK & Italy ... To Paris & Berlin I would suggest to be careful ...
     
  23. william walker

    william walker New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2012
    Messages:
    1,289
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    0
    This is how the EU works, you have one group of countries gaining another losing they then have a massive long debate and come up with something in the middle which the commission must then accept. The UK, Italy, Holland can work together on this one issue, but could they form a groups within the EU to rival Germany and France, no. On different issue they will have to accept what Germany and France wants, on others they will disagree with each other.

    With the UK is has been terrible for the EU and Cameron, with a rising anti-EU party UKIP gaining from it. Even if Cameron can cut or even remove the increasing funding the damage has been done.
     
  24. AboveAlpha

    AboveAlpha Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2013
    Messages:
    30,284
    Likes Received:
    612
    Trophy Points:
    83
    If I was a Citizen of the U.K. I certainly would not want to be apart of the E.U. either.

    AboveAlpha
     
  25. lunecat

    lunecat Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2006
    Messages:
    4,677
    Likes Received:
    19
    Trophy Points:
    38
    If the UK were to leave the EU, we would be financially, politically & morally better off. Now that WTO agreements are in place the benifits of the EEC have been surpassed. I see no benifits in enslaving the British people to the social democratic policies of the EU.

    There is a creeping Fabianism of the EU & big business, that benifits from putting the British working class in a position that forces them to compete with cheap labour from the rest of Europe. The Politicians of WestMinster/Cardiff & Ednburgh have done little to address the needs of the British people & have consistently given away our sovereignty to the point that I would vote for ANY party, no matter what their political views were, if they would lead us out of EU membership.
     

Share This Page