So how does more taxes, more unaccountable unelected bureaucrats, more ridiculous regulations, less independent ability to make domestic policy and less control over immigrant numbers from Islamic countries (Britain already has enough problems with Muslims now) help the UK? This is a no brainer.
13
One reason to hang together is the 50 million European dead as a result of 20th century wars. Britain lost the WWI and WWII generations of young men. Pulling away from its neighbors, no matter the disadvantages, would be ignoring recent lessons.
Britain has always been in favour of a free-trade area as well as cooperation in standards and international issues, such as the environment. Britain has never wanted a supra-national state, especially one in which it has a TINY voting influence of just over 8%. So those paragons of the rule of law, Romania, Cyprus, Malta, Croatia, Greece, Italy, Slovakia, and several others, will decide what's right for Britain. The citizens of ALL these countries must be considered on the same basis as the citizens of Britain.
Now, NYT reader, imagine that NAFTA had expanded to encompass all of Central America (your near neighbours) and deep into South America. You all have a common market, opened up business opportunities, the free movement of capital, and the free movement of people. Wonderful business opportunities! How rich all of the Americas will be.
The laws will be decided NOT by the citizens of the USA but by the Bureaucrats of the Americas, with the agreement of the Foreign Affairs ministers of each country. The US doesn't have a majority vote and can be outvoted by a grouping of several south American countries.
How many of you would sign up to this?
Now, NYT reader, imagine that NAFTA had expanded to encompass all of Central America (your near neighbours) and deep into South America. You all have a common market, opened up business opportunities, the free movement of capital, and the free movement of people. Wonderful business opportunities! How rich all of the Americas will be.
The laws will be decided NOT by the citizens of the USA but by the Bureaucrats of the Americas, with the agreement of the Foreign Affairs ministers of each country. The US doesn't have a majority vote and can be outvoted by a grouping of several south American countries.
How many of you would sign up to this?
15
Once Britain leaves, Frankfurt will be the financial center of Europe.
Britain will only exit the E.U. if London can be the new Wall Street.
And Britain will be allowed to be the financial center of the world only if it becomes the 51st state of America.
Britain will only exit the E.U. if London can be the new Wall Street.
And Britain will be allowed to be the financial center of the world only if it becomes the 51st state of America.
2
Norway (not in EU) seems to be doing fine.
EU membership trashed manufacturing in the midlands and replaced a straightforward sales tax with a convoluted VAT. It also drove a wedge between the US: an American English-speaking foreign worker often found him/herself sidelined.
EU membership trashed manufacturing in the midlands and replaced a straightforward sales tax with a convoluted VAT. It also drove a wedge between the US: an American English-speaking foreign worker often found him/herself sidelined.
6
First, the EU is not equivalent to Europe. One is an administrative apparatus, the other is a culture, and Britain is not talking about leaving Europe.
Second, the EU *desperately* needs some pushback, and leaving aside the question of possible consequences to Britain's economy, I'm glad somebody is resisting the EU's current course. The EU is fantastic at being a huge chamber of commerce / consumer protection agency, but consistently horrible at anything that an increasingly integrating political union is supposed to be able to do, like joint economic strategy, foreign policy, immigration, etc. The vision of becoming something like a United States of Europe came from a generation who saw this as their best hope of avoiding another pan-European war, but by now it should be clear that intertwined economies and extensive travel have accomplished that goal, and that a U.S. of E. simply doesn't work in practice. In short, the EU's reach exceeds its grasp and I hope a few other countries follow GB's example and demand that the EU be trimmed back to what it does well and abandons its efforts in areas that it doesn't.
Second, the EU *desperately* needs some pushback, and leaving aside the question of possible consequences to Britain's economy, I'm glad somebody is resisting the EU's current course. The EU is fantastic at being a huge chamber of commerce / consumer protection agency, but consistently horrible at anything that an increasingly integrating political union is supposed to be able to do, like joint economic strategy, foreign policy, immigration, etc. The vision of becoming something like a United States of Europe came from a generation who saw this as their best hope of avoiding another pan-European war, but by now it should be clear that intertwined economies and extensive travel have accomplished that goal, and that a U.S. of E. simply doesn't work in practice. In short, the EU's reach exceeds its grasp and I hope a few other countries follow GB's example and demand that the EU be trimmed back to what it does well and abandons its efforts in areas that it doesn't.
11
The concept of giving a preferential treatment to a reluctant partner is absurd. It is like keep seducing a bad marriage partner who keeps taking but giving little or none. Let UK go and then see it start facing the music within its own shaky boundaries
Your readers may like to read today's statement from the Danish Prime Minister, Lars Lokke Rasmussen, following talks in Copenhagen. Mr Rasmussen said Denmark - which also retains its own currency - did not object to any of the UK's proposals and did not expect them to be significantly amended in the coming weeks.He said the EU needed to retain a "strong British voice". "I truly believe that adopting this package will create a better Europe," he said. On the issue of welfare curbs, which is proving a stick point for a number of other EU members, Mr Rasmussen said individual members should be able to "protect" their national welfare systems from abuse."It creates momentum towards the goal of ensuring that the EU does not develop into a social union," he said. "We need to ensure that EU citizens move across borders to work, not to seek a high level of benefits. The package also contains an emergency brake which is specifically designed to handle the particular problems faced by the UK in regard to in-work benefits. That is perfectly understandable and acceptable to us."
5
Seems to me this is like the end of a meaningful united Europe. Like the old poem about the Arab and his camel that first only wanted his nose in the tent and eventually occupied the whole tent the situation is now seen to be reversed with Britain edging out of its European situation rather than in. Other countries may want to claim exceptional circumstances as well. Lastly, in the United Kingdom the Scots definitely feel more European than the Anglo-Saxons so this may bring about the end of the United Kingdom as well.
I am unsure that Britain is a good cultural fit for continental Europe. Keeping their own currency and the advantages that brings to the banking sector is about the only thing that currently floats Britain, which lacks industrial production and a sustainable agriculture. (>90% of their GDP is services.) A Brexit would allow the Euro banks to reshape their banking in ways that could mean loss of business (Deutsche Bank would be thrilled, I'm sure). That, in turn, would likely increase overseas activities of British banks leading to more competition here in the US. Furthermore, half of Poland apparently camping out in Britain would have to go back, which would free up jobs for the jobless Brits. Imports would get more expensive which might help in the expansion of Britains industrial sector. The banking sector will be less than pleased which is going to be the main reason why there will be both former and current Tories and Labour ministers running about the minute the first poll shows rejection of the EU. (Scotland playbook.) In the long run, I see only advantages in the Brexit for the common Brit and mainland European. Leave them. You know you want to.
10
I've lived part of the time in the EU since before the EU was the EU.
At the outset the idea was economic: facilitating the flow of people and products between the main European countries. Great Idea. Fully installed by the mid Eighties when the mainland powers decided it should also be a political union - like America. Uniformize us.
I developed a motto: The strength of Europe is in its diversity, not uniformity.
Over the years, uniformity has grown from a grain of sand in the EU gears to a sandstorm. Brussels has become a Monster Kafka complete with the corruption, inefficiency, and incompetence of all giant nations from America to Russia to China or India and Brazil.
The English just don't get it. They really seem to not like corruption, inefficiency, and incompetence. They even say they don't want to pay for it. Maybe it's because they live on a little island.
The Editors of the NYT, on the other hand, have learned to embrace those qualities. As the voice of the armchair Establishment they think it's just fine. We love it. Why shouldn't they?
At the outset the idea was economic: facilitating the flow of people and products between the main European countries. Great Idea. Fully installed by the mid Eighties when the mainland powers decided it should also be a political union - like America. Uniformize us.
I developed a motto: The strength of Europe is in its diversity, not uniformity.
Over the years, uniformity has grown from a grain of sand in the EU gears to a sandstorm. Brussels has become a Monster Kafka complete with the corruption, inefficiency, and incompetence of all giant nations from America to Russia to China or India and Brazil.
The English just don't get it. They really seem to not like corruption, inefficiency, and incompetence. They even say they don't want to pay for it. Maybe it's because they live on a little island.
The Editors of the NYT, on the other hand, have learned to embrace those qualities. As the voice of the armchair Establishment they think it's just fine. We love it. Why shouldn't they?
36
What a beautiful comment Pierre! I've also lived in Europe for 27 years and travel there often and can't agree more.
7
The men who created the early forms of the EU in the shadow of WW2 placed a high value on things that would keep France and Germany from having a future war.
Today that seems an absurd fear. That is what success looks like.
Part of the original conception to prevent war was ever closer union. What they could not do overnight, they would build up to slowly, just as Germany itself grew slowly out of a customs union over half a century in the 19th Century.
Britain has a secondary place in that set of priorities. It has in the past been fine to be offshore and separate, balancing the Continental powers. That is not unreasonable, as long as the EU survives in form sufficient to the purpose of binding France and Germany.
Yet Britain always feared a combination of France and Germany. That is too much for Britain to balance. It becomes a threat. In that view, Britain must not be left out of power that could overwhelm it.
Today that seems an absurd fear. That is what success looks like.
Part of the original conception to prevent war was ever closer union. What they could not do overnight, they would build up to slowly, just as Germany itself grew slowly out of a customs union over half a century in the 19th Century.
Britain has a secondary place in that set of priorities. It has in the past been fine to be offshore and separate, balancing the Continental powers. That is not unreasonable, as long as the EU survives in form sufficient to the purpose of binding France and Germany.
Yet Britain always feared a combination of France and Germany. That is too much for Britain to balance. It becomes a threat. In that view, Britain must not be left out of power that could overwhelm it.
3
A sensible and fair assessment.
However, as a Brit there is something within us that makes us different from Europeans as a whole. We do not claim superiority it is just that we are fundamentally different and the differences are very powerful.
Most of the EU is basically the Old Holy Roman Empire with most countries remaining Roman Catholic.
EU Countries practice a form of Roman law/Napoleonic law, where as we as does America operate under Common Law.
EU nations with only perhaps one exception, have within living memory been occupied by an aggressor or languished under a dictator or both. Perhaps it is that which makes it easier for them to hand over sovereignty to another power.
Our Civil War was fought to establish the absolute sovereignty of Parliament with a monarch simply a constitutional figure head.
We accept our world wide Empire is no more despite our critics constantly referring to it but we still have kith and kin in English speaking nations around the world. Nations by the way that many Europeans have been glad to emigrate to despite the original Britishness of places like Australia, New Zealand and most of Canada.
We will decide our own fate one way or the other but one thing no one can criticise us for is an unwillingness to face the world.
However, as a Brit there is something within us that makes us different from Europeans as a whole. We do not claim superiority it is just that we are fundamentally different and the differences are very powerful.
Most of the EU is basically the Old Holy Roman Empire with most countries remaining Roman Catholic.
EU Countries practice a form of Roman law/Napoleonic law, where as we as does America operate under Common Law.
EU nations with only perhaps one exception, have within living memory been occupied by an aggressor or languished under a dictator or both. Perhaps it is that which makes it easier for them to hand over sovereignty to another power.
Our Civil War was fought to establish the absolute sovereignty of Parliament with a monarch simply a constitutional figure head.
We accept our world wide Empire is no more despite our critics constantly referring to it but we still have kith and kin in English speaking nations around the world. Nations by the way that many Europeans have been glad to emigrate to despite the original Britishness of places like Australia, New Zealand and most of Canada.
We will decide our own fate one way or the other but one thing no one can criticise us for is an unwillingness to face the world.
18
I entirely agree that the British physical separation and consequent differing experiences of war are important. I also agree that the British system of government and law has evolved separately and very differently. I am very aware of the differences in law because they are so much in evidence in American law that I practice.
However, my key point is that Britain has always rightly been exquisitely sensitive to the balance of power on the Continent. A unified Continent with Britain alone on the outside is a nightmare that has recurred from Elizabethan times, Napoleonic times, inspiied WW1 involvement, and went badly in WW2. I can not see the British government now ignoring that concern. It never has. Nor ought it to have done.
However, my key point is that Britain has always rightly been exquisitely sensitive to the balance of power on the Continent. A unified Continent with Britain alone on the outside is a nightmare that has recurred from Elizabethan times, Napoleonic times, inspiied WW1 involvement, and went badly in WW2. I can not see the British government now ignoring that concern. It never has. Nor ought it to have done.
3
The endless advising, hectoring, pontificating, demanding, grieving, pondering, pestering, and interfering of this Board is one of the wonders of the world. There is no ant crossing a mud-dried creek in Tanzania that could not be subject to its lumbering attention, earnest concern, and fervent recommendations.
15
FYI: The EU is a horrendous bureaucracy where for the mere effort to run a single project one needs 10-12 yards of paperwork and to obey a myriad of laws and regulations, inspections, and conflicting interests. EU is run by a bunch of unelected, boring bureaucrats who are paid huge salaries for pushing papers and making things harder for all. The EU bureaucrats take all the decisions based on what will further their own careers to an even bigger salary in the EU food chain. And they slavishly try to please Merkel. There is no system of checks and balances. No democratic accountability.
The EU residents feel like their countries no longer belong to them: their industries, their policies, their imports and exports, even their national debt (they are forced to buy EU products at bigger prices or things they'd normally produce internally at pennies per Euro), their sovereignty and national immigration policies.
Great Britain was great long before it joined the EU and will be great long after it will exit the EU. Brits are always welcome to travel and trade with the rest of Europe.
It is time for all EU countries to organize referendums on all the things they want changed in the way EU it is now run. There never has been such a referendum, which makes the EU a very undemocratic structure. Of course, Brussels opposes such thing. When will we read the NYT editorial position questioning Brussels's dictatorship?
The EU residents feel like their countries no longer belong to them: their industries, their policies, their imports and exports, even their national debt (they are forced to buy EU products at bigger prices or things they'd normally produce internally at pennies per Euro), their sovereignty and national immigration policies.
Great Britain was great long before it joined the EU and will be great long after it will exit the EU. Brits are always welcome to travel and trade with the rest of Europe.
It is time for all EU countries to organize referendums on all the things they want changed in the way EU it is now run. There never has been such a referendum, which makes the EU a very undemocratic structure. Of course, Brussels opposes such thing. When will we read the NYT editorial position questioning Brussels's dictatorship?
14
I wonder how 10,000 middle-eastern refugees would play in the Hamptons or Chappaqua?
The dear Editorial Board seems to forget that meddling in the domestic politics of another nation is the essence of being the ugly American...
But that doesn't seem to stop them.
The dear Editorial Board seems to forget that meddling in the domestic politics of another nation is the essence of being the ugly American...
But that doesn't seem to stop them.
18
They have no problem telling the rest of us what we should do either!
8
What is the meaning and measure of the European Union when only 28 of 50 European nations belong to the economic union and a mere 19 nations are part of the currency zone known as the Eurozone. There is no political union among European nations that are rapidly aging and shrinking with below replacement level birthrates.
Britain is America's naturally normally closest ethnic sectarian socioeconomic political diplomatic military ally. One purpose of the E.U. and the E.Z. was and is to temper and tie Germany to Europe. But Germany must subdue it's socioeconomic political military diplomatic power. There are more German Americans than there are any other kind of Americans. The British royals are of German origin.
Britain is America's naturally normally closest ethnic sectarian socioeconomic political diplomatic military ally. One purpose of the E.U. and the E.Z. was and is to temper and tie Germany to Europe. But Germany must subdue it's socioeconomic political military diplomatic power. There are more German Americans than there are any other kind of Americans. The British royals are of German origin.
Monetary union leads to political union. Have you never heard the cries of the Euro states for ever closer union? That is something we are not prepared be our fate.
1
"One purpose of the E.U. and the E.Z. was and is to temper and tie Germany to Europe."
I guess that part of the plan worked a little too well, didn't it?
I guess that part of the plan worked a little too well, didn't it?
This entire editorial is based upon one single British claim as exactly stated in the column: " Mr. Tusk’s plan would create a special mechanism to protect non-euro members — Britain never adopted the euro and proudly uses its own currency — from any unfair advantage eurozone countries may have." This leads to only 2 choices:
1. Most of the non eurozone countries (to include the UK) decided by their own free will to NOT join the eurozone. I imagine they did because advantages in NOT joining must have outweighed the inconveniences . If that is the case, I do not understand why the eurozone countries have an advantage and, if they have, why it is unfair? I then do not see why the UK is trying to change the rules of the eurozone that they do not belong to.
2. if there is indeed an advantage that outweighs the inconveniences, I suggest the UK joins the eurozone.
Whatever the proposal of the European Council president is, I sincerely hope that the people of Europe will have the opportunity to directly validate this proposal. Europe has been, for too long, muddied by the lack of direct democracy and myriads of exceptions obtained by a panel of countries (most of the time the UK is at the forefront of this panel). We need now, to stop this in order to propose the people of Europe a clear path to progress.
Since Britain will not change its attitude, I only see winners if it exits the E.U. The sooner, the better.
1. Most of the non eurozone countries (to include the UK) decided by their own free will to NOT join the eurozone. I imagine they did because advantages in NOT joining must have outweighed the inconveniences . If that is the case, I do not understand why the eurozone countries have an advantage and, if they have, why it is unfair? I then do not see why the UK is trying to change the rules of the eurozone that they do not belong to.
2. if there is indeed an advantage that outweighs the inconveniences, I suggest the UK joins the eurozone.
Whatever the proposal of the European Council president is, I sincerely hope that the people of Europe will have the opportunity to directly validate this proposal. Europe has been, for too long, muddied by the lack of direct democracy and myriads of exceptions obtained by a panel of countries (most of the time the UK is at the forefront of this panel). We need now, to stop this in order to propose the people of Europe a clear path to progress.
Since Britain will not change its attitude, I only see winners if it exits the E.U. The sooner, the better.
3
Why should the UK always get a special treatment?
Mr. Cameron said, rightly, that the UK gets "the best of both world". I do not see why this should be the case.
the UK pays less than their share, torpedoes with gusto any political or military integration. the UK always sought to divide Europe, then for its own survival, now to foster the US interests.
Moreover, British people do not consider themselves as Europeans, they "fly to Europe" Something no German or Portuguese would say.
Frankly, it is best for everyone that they leave Europe. They will remain somehow in the common market and travel freely. Only drawback: they will have to cede Dordogneshire back to France
I
Mr. Cameron said, rightly, that the UK gets "the best of both world". I do not see why this should be the case.
the UK pays less than their share, torpedoes with gusto any political or military integration. the UK always sought to divide Europe, then for its own survival, now to foster the US interests.
Moreover, British people do not consider themselves as Europeans, they "fly to Europe" Something no German or Portuguese would say.
Frankly, it is best for everyone that they leave Europe. They will remain somehow in the common market and travel freely. Only drawback: they will have to cede Dordogneshire back to France
I
5
We pay the second largest in contributions after Germany, and we are the secopnd largest economy after Germany. And remind me. Is Switzerland a member stte of the E.U? No? Why not? In other words shut up.
8
You seem to forget that England has been forced over the last 10 years to accept millions of people who came to England not to flee prosecution but to suck up benefits,housing,etc. Switzerland has not. The English people want to stop the gaming of their system and the theft of their property, and exiting the EU seems to be the only way to stop the leeches from coming over the border.
5
I find it right and proper that the UK be able to oppose and opt out of EU policies when they go too far (i.e. days ending in "y"). The question is, why aren't the other member states being given this right? They should all have this option, are they too meek to demand it?
1
I've always failed to see an advantage for Britain in this relationship. The country is over run with Eastern Europeans who are coming mostly for the benefits. It has had to put Border Patrol agents in France to inspect trucks for illegals trying to sneak in.
The British people obviously feel the same way as I do. That's why Cameron had to promise to hold a plebiscite so they can vote to get out.
The British people obviously feel the same way as I do. That's why Cameron had to promise to hold a plebiscite so they can vote to get out.
14
You have been reading too much propaganda, the East Europeans - mainly Poles are hard working and contribute to the British and Irish economies and do not come for benefits. Britain unfortunately is very insular and many still believe they have an empire - don't like non English speaking immigrants.
As for "Brexit" good riddance - they contribute nothing to Europe as a whole.
As for "Brexit" good riddance - they contribute nothing to Europe as a whole.
4
"Britain unfortunately is very insular and many still believe they have an empire - don't like non English speaking immigrants.
As for "Brexit" good riddance - they contribute nothing to Europe as a whole."
Oh dear another ill-informed Brit hater.Two generations have been born since the demise of Empire. We got over that long ago. You may not know but the Empire operated a totally free trade system that excluded no one. I see you are from Ireland. Just remember when your profligate over spending landed you in the proverbial only a few years ago and as an act of friendship you had a bail out from us of £14 billion pounds.
As for "Brexit" good riddance - they contribute nothing to Europe as a whole."
Oh dear another ill-informed Brit hater.Two generations have been born since the demise of Empire. We got over that long ago. You may not know but the Empire operated a totally free trade system that excluded no one. I see you are from Ireland. Just remember when your profligate over spending landed you in the proverbial only a few years ago and as an act of friendship you had a bail out from us of £14 billion pounds.
18
Sadly, the NYTED, as USUALLY does't get it right and is out of touch. (e.g: endorsement of Hillary, Kasich, strong push for the Muslim invasion of Europe with its disastrous results, and its strong push for the war in Iraq).
As a dual EU/US citizen I can tell that the E.U. as is does nor function for its members and many other E.U. countries side with the UK on this. Sure, it works for Germany and perhaps also for France, but not for the rest. The recent immigration crisis when countries had been forced by Merkel and Brussels to open themselves to mass Muslim migration against their own constitution, and against the will of their governments and people, it's the most glaring example. National economies have been transformed by big capital of the big EU countries (such as Germany) in colonies where the national output stopped and was stopped and countries have been forced to import everything from a few key players.
The countries of E.U. are not like the states of USA: They each have a different language, history and cultural sensitivity, the by-product of thousands of years of wars for survival and preservation of cultural identity with blood, and NOBODY wants to melt in the multiculturalism imposed by Brussels and strongly pushed by the big foreign policy bumbler, the US gov and its establishment media such as the NYT.
E.U. should be re-thought and I am grateful for the Britons for taking the lead!
As a dual EU/US citizen I can tell that the E.U. as is does nor function for its members and many other E.U. countries side with the UK on this. Sure, it works for Germany and perhaps also for France, but not for the rest. The recent immigration crisis when countries had been forced by Merkel and Brussels to open themselves to mass Muslim migration against their own constitution, and against the will of their governments and people, it's the most glaring example. National economies have been transformed by big capital of the big EU countries (such as Germany) in colonies where the national output stopped and was stopped and countries have been forced to import everything from a few key players.
The countries of E.U. are not like the states of USA: They each have a different language, history and cultural sensitivity, the by-product of thousands of years of wars for survival and preservation of cultural identity with blood, and NOBODY wants to melt in the multiculturalism imposed by Brussels and strongly pushed by the big foreign policy bumbler, the US gov and its establishment media such as the NYT.
E.U. should be re-thought and I am grateful for the Britons for taking the lead!
18
Mr. Tusk's concessions are in large say merely small and meaningless gestures designed to placate British voters. British voters are likely not impressed. Britain wants total control over its sovereign borders, total control over its immigration policies irrespective of the wishes of black hole of Brussels.
British voters are not interested in turning their island into a polyglot society and disassembling their history and culture to please current notions of racial and ethnic diversity.
As a matter of fact its not only the British that are re-thinking how to regain lost sovereignty it is France, Germany and a host of other EU nations.
British voters are not interested in turning their island into a polyglot society and disassembling their history and culture to please current notions of racial and ethnic diversity.
As a matter of fact its not only the British that are re-thinking how to regain lost sovereignty it is France, Germany and a host of other EU nations.
11
Britain, please learn from our union of states! If you subordinate yourself to a limited Union government, it will slowly consume your state Sovereignty far beyond what was ever understood.
Over two centuries ago we formed an American Union of 13 independent "United" states. The Union (Federal Government) would handle matters primarily external to the states, The states would maintain sovereignty over domestic life. Instead, the Federal Government grew backed by its own courts, moving into areas reserved to the states. Our National Debt approaches 19 Trillion, old age pensions have been nationalized (social security) and health care is following (ACA). Contrary to the original design our own Union has become a tool of domestic wealth redistribution.
http://www.constitution.org/fed/federa45.htm
Madison Describes the design in the constitution in Federalist 45 as follows:
"The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government, are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce; with which last the power of taxation will, for the most part, be connected. The powers reserved to the several States will extend to all the objects which, in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties, and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement, and prosperity of the State."
Over two centuries ago we formed an American Union of 13 independent "United" states. The Union (Federal Government) would handle matters primarily external to the states, The states would maintain sovereignty over domestic life. Instead, the Federal Government grew backed by its own courts, moving into areas reserved to the states. Our National Debt approaches 19 Trillion, old age pensions have been nationalized (social security) and health care is following (ACA). Contrary to the original design our own Union has become a tool of domestic wealth redistribution.
http://www.constitution.org/fed/federa45.htm
Madison Describes the design in the constitution in Federalist 45 as follows:
"The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government, are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce; with which last the power of taxation will, for the most part, be connected. The powers reserved to the several States will extend to all the objects which, in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties, and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement, and prosperity of the State."
5
The price of freedom is endless vigilance. The price of European Union is endless bureaucracy.
EU directives have destroyed industry after industry in the UK. The recent ending of the Land Rover Defender line of off-road vehicles can be laid partly at the door of bureaucrats who only see things their way. Maybe you can make a living as part of Deutschland gmbH, but try being a small entrepreneur and see what happens to you as the VAT tax bites and you hack through the forest of directives.
The migrant crisis is just the straw that may break the camel's back. Too many people have seen too much removed from their lives and they blame the EU. That's why the UK may finally decide to stop the rot.
EU directives have destroyed industry after industry in the UK. The recent ending of the Land Rover Defender line of off-road vehicles can be laid partly at the door of bureaucrats who only see things their way. Maybe you can make a living as part of Deutschland gmbH, but try being a small entrepreneur and see what happens to you as the VAT tax bites and you hack through the forest of directives.
The migrant crisis is just the straw that may break the camel's back. Too many people have seen too much removed from their lives and they blame the EU. That's why the UK may finally decide to stop the rot.
13
If the voters of the UK vote to leave the EU, the only losers will be the over paid, under perforning bureaucrats who are running the present EU. It seems that all the EU has been efficient at doing is paying itself lavishly. The inability to manage the current migration is the clearest example of how seriously dysfunctional this organization actually is. If the Brits decide to save their money and leave, good for them.
16
"Everyone Loses if Britain Exits the E.U."
Everyone, that is, except Britain.
Everyone, that is, except Britain.
21
A European Union should not be a mechanism to redistribute greatness and wealth from a few exceptional nations to many mediocre ones. This creates a large cultural and economic cost to the nations with the highest standings.
Distinct Unions that might make sense are:
1. Britain Germany, and France.
2. The reset of Western Europe.
3. Eastern Europe.
Each of those individual unions could serve their labor / people needs through careful selection of immigrants into those unions considering the economic and social culture of that Union.
John
Distinct Unions that might make sense are:
1. Britain Germany, and France.
2. The reset of Western Europe.
3. Eastern Europe.
Each of those individual unions could serve their labor / people needs through careful selection of immigrants into those unions considering the economic and social culture of that Union.
John
3
Oh, and by the way? The UK has the only viable defence force, such as it is, in the entire EU.
And I notice that the New York TIMES is incapable even of reporting on Britain's issues with the EU without putting in another plug for the migrants - ignoring the fact that even the EU has acknowledged that at least 60% of them are economic migrants, that the rest of the EU's electorates are angry about what Merkel did and the failure to protect the EU's external borders, that most of them are young, able-bodied men, about the staggering tax bill facing German taxpayers and Merkel's plunging poll ratings. . .as if you know it is just those nasty selfish Brits who don't want the EU telling them how many migrants they have to take in. . .
And I notice that the New York TIMES is incapable even of reporting on Britain's issues with the EU without putting in another plug for the migrants - ignoring the fact that even the EU has acknowledged that at least 60% of them are economic migrants, that the rest of the EU's electorates are angry about what Merkel did and the failure to protect the EU's external borders, that most of them are young, able-bodied men, about the staggering tax bill facing German taxpayers and Merkel's plunging poll ratings. . .as if you know it is just those nasty selfish Brits who don't want the EU telling them how many migrants they have to take in. . .
28
Wow, if the predictions of all you bitter colonials come true and Britain collapses as a result of an EU exit the amount of heat generated by the schadenfreude on these comments boards will provide enough energy to keep Manhattan going for a few weeks
2
Britain's real problem with the EU is that they can't control it. They're just one moderately large state, unable to dominate. They're like Texas, constantly claiming some kind of special status, a right to secede into a new Republic of Texas.
Sensible Europeans would say good riddance.
Sensible Europeans would say good riddance.
3
Britain's history is one of greatness and not mediocrity. If most influence goes to great nations, you can expect greatness. If most goes to mediocrity, you can expect mediocrity. While, and individuals we are all born with the equal rights, as groups and individuals, we are not entitled to fruits of the capabilities of others whether at the individual or national level. We have a right to protection from tyranny, not to be given the fruits of another nations historical efforts. We must build our own material wealth and economic environment.
7
As one who lives in the EU, I disagree. I believe that the primary problem the UK has with the EU is that the EU as an administrative apparatus is highly dysfunctional and utterly incompetent as a global player. The continental partners all have their own reasons for supporting it - Germany because the EU is such a lovely idea (never mind whether it works in practice, that's not important), and many other member states support it because they get money from it. The EU is a farce, and the UK is right to say as much.
4
It's quite telling that this article doesn't touch upon the longtime problem of the UK's inability to deport radical imams who call for the violent overthrow of the democracy and violence against unbelievers, all because the EU says it would violate the human rights of the imams. The EU constraints on national sovereignty are in some instance nothing short of lunacy.
15
The NYT likes the concept of the EU because it is a top-heavy, anti-democratic bureaucratic apparatus that has the power to force people to do things that they would never vote for and actively oppose.
27
From an economic standpoint, Great Britain's exit from the European Union would have little effect as both parties would desire to keep all trade agreements in place to their mutual benefit. Politically, Britain might lose some influence in Brussels, but such influence is currently negligible which has led Britain to seek this possible exit.
Your editorial omits one important point in any possible Brexit. The greatest danger Britain faces in exiting the EU is that it would strengthen Scotland's argument that it must secede from Great Britain since its politics and values are more aligned with EU nations. Having been snubbed by Britain, the EU may be more open to Scotland as a member should it secede from Great Britain. As an independent nation and EU member, Scotland would be more willing to accept thousands of refugees who, once in Scotland, presumably could across over to England through an open border. Thus, by exiting the EU, Britain would be opening the door to the immigration issue it is now trying to avoid by leaving.
The feel good tonic that Brexit offers certain Britons would shortly be replaced by a lasting and crippling hangover.
Your editorial omits one important point in any possible Brexit. The greatest danger Britain faces in exiting the EU is that it would strengthen Scotland's argument that it must secede from Great Britain since its politics and values are more aligned with EU nations. Having been snubbed by Britain, the EU may be more open to Scotland as a member should it secede from Great Britain. As an independent nation and EU member, Scotland would be more willing to accept thousands of refugees who, once in Scotland, presumably could across over to England through an open border. Thus, by exiting the EU, Britain would be opening the door to the immigration issue it is now trying to avoid by leaving.
The feel good tonic that Brexit offers certain Britons would shortly be replaced by a lasting and crippling hangover.
1
With the amount of time the UK Border Patrol spends now raising Halal butcher shops and Indian restaurats I doubr there would be much of an increase in illegals entering the country.
I wish my own country was as thorough as the British emigration officers.
I wish my own country was as thorough as the British emigration officers.
4
Probably not. At this point Scotland does not have the means to become an independent nation. The value of its oil has dropped significantly. The EU no longer has the means to support a Scottish nation either. If anything, it is the migrant crisis that will keep Scotland firmly tethered to Englamd -- Scots have even less of an appetite for Middle Eastern migrants than England.
2
No, not everyone.
When someone loses then someone wins. I think it is a law of nature or maybe it comes from the Bible. Maybe Tupac.
But somebody will win. Don't worry about that.
When someone loses then someone wins. I think it is a law of nature or maybe it comes from the Bible. Maybe Tupac.
But somebody will win. Don't worry about that.
2
Everyone also loses with no truthful journalistic coverage of the TTP scam which is happening now. As society, justice and sanity is striped from this world no journalists seem to care, maybe because the TTP is news and not entertainment it might not fit today's standards for what qualifies as journalism.
3
Good riddance to Britannia is what I say. Let's see if they can unite their own kingdom under one flag before heralding the EU as morally and financially inept. The EU will move ahead without the UK just fine. Please close the door on your way out.
2
So can England send you the migrants they have been stuck with for 20 years?
1
You paint a major share of the world with British pink, it comes back to bite you. Your strategic thinking gets stuck in Napoleonic times, you continually relive the same old problems.
At least one country has some common sense. Good for Englsnd.
16
Great Britain conquered India, defeated China, and triumphed over the Ottoman Empire, the Austro-Hungarian Empire, and the German Empire. They beat Napoleon at Waterloo, and whipped the vaunted Spanish Armada. They helped defeat the Nazis and, later, the Soviet Union. Britain is the greatest nation of all-time. Why should they be subservient to the countries of the EU, when none of which have achieved the greatness of Britain?
13
Pretty sure that tunnel has two sides, right?
4
Britain's exit from the EU could lead to the breakup of the U.K. and leave England all alone which many in the Conservative party are hoping for if the Brexit is successful.
With the compromise laid out by Mr. Tusk, it's now up to David Cameron to persuade Britain to do what I think he believes is the right thing: realize that Britain's national interests are better served by this loose league of partnership with the EU. It 's all about leadership and I think Mr. cAmeron has the ability to sell it to the people of Britain.
With the compromise laid out by Mr. Tusk, it's now up to David Cameron to persuade Britain to do what I think he believes is the right thing: realize that Britain's national interests are better served by this loose league of partnership with the EU. It 's all about leadership and I think Mr. cAmeron has the ability to sell it to the people of Britain.
OK, a British resident here, and pro EU voter.
1.The UK is the E.U's second largest economy, the second largest net contributor, and the primary military power.
2. In 1942 Churchill said "I look forward to a United States of Europe, in which the barriers between the nations will be greatly minimised and unrestricted travel will be possible." The E.U concept was originally promoted by a Brit in the middle of the W.W.2, fighting to free Europe!
3.Many Brits are pro-European, despite the rhetoric from BOTH sides - but the usual cliches 'perfidious Albion','loss of Empire', 'little island' etc we hear all the time from some European 'friends'. It is boring and should be consigned to history.
4.We are still a proud democratic nation, and do find it difficult to understand why we have to seek 'approval' to change our own systems from an unelected body. It should be noted that 1.5 million Poles currently live and work in the UK, more than 165,000 EU residents migrate to the UK EACH YEAR and 400,000 French residents live in London. This immigration has had a dramatic impact on some of our towns and cities, to the point that in some areas they are mono-cultural.
5. The original concept was an Economic Union, not political union, a concept probably not acceptable in several other EU nations either.
6. Without the UK, Europe will be dominated by the Franco-German axis. I did not elect either Holland or Merkel to make decisions on my 'behalf' eg Ukraine, the migration crisis.
1.The UK is the E.U's second largest economy, the second largest net contributor, and the primary military power.
2. In 1942 Churchill said "I look forward to a United States of Europe, in which the barriers between the nations will be greatly minimised and unrestricted travel will be possible." The E.U concept was originally promoted by a Brit in the middle of the W.W.2, fighting to free Europe!
3.Many Brits are pro-European, despite the rhetoric from BOTH sides - but the usual cliches 'perfidious Albion','loss of Empire', 'little island' etc we hear all the time from some European 'friends'. It is boring and should be consigned to history.
4.We are still a proud democratic nation, and do find it difficult to understand why we have to seek 'approval' to change our own systems from an unelected body. It should be noted that 1.5 million Poles currently live and work in the UK, more than 165,000 EU residents migrate to the UK EACH YEAR and 400,000 French residents live in London. This immigration has had a dramatic impact on some of our towns and cities, to the point that in some areas they are mono-cultural.
5. The original concept was an Economic Union, not political union, a concept probably not acceptable in several other EU nations either.
6. Without the UK, Europe will be dominated by the Franco-German axis. I did not elect either Holland or Merkel to make decisions on my 'behalf' eg Ukraine, the migration crisis.
14
Fellow Brit here, don't take all the 'banter' to heart, the NYT is traditionally the home of smug folk who seem perversely oblivious to their own country's history of imperialism and barbarism.
7
It is self-evident that a British exit from the EU is a lose, lose proposition, for the EU and for Britain. But who is going to explain this to the thick, insular Little Englanders who has never reconciled to the loss of Empire and whose nostalgia is shamelessly exploited by the right-wing press controlled by the likes of Murdoch? Of course, the irony is that it is the same people who were so vociferously against Scotland leaving the UK who are at the forefront of the Brexit madness. They cannot see the parallels in the UK exiting the EU to Scottish independence. More than that, they fail to see that the rabid nationalism underlying their opposition to EU undermines the very existence of the UK. A vote to exit the EU is sure to trigger another referendum in Scotland. Only this time a Yes vote would be preordained.
2
This post by Ajs3 typifies the disdain that the progressive elite holds for basically everyone who doesn't see the world the way they do. And this is why you are being rejected.
6
The EU's existential crisis goes beyond Brexit and Immigration. Southern Europe has been in a state of economic depression for nearly a decade now with no end in sight. Having a common currency for countries with different work ethic, skills, tax structure and national narratives is not workable. It is just a matter of time before the Markets push the EU common currency in the dustbin of history where it belongs.
6
The creation of the EU was once a promising step towards unification. But what unification has come to mean is technocratic rule by the financial elite. Given the EUs treatment of Greece, it is no wonder that membership has become less compelling to Britain.
13
Cameron's compromise seems like a reasonable way to defuse the amped-up political crisis at this moment, while prolonging the intense doubt as to whether Britain substantially benefits from being part of the EU.
Britain's troubled relationship with federalism has been even clumsier than the USA's. It seems likely that Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland would respond to a new effort by Westminster to rebuild walls by trying out a few new walls of their own.
Britain's troubled relationship with federalism has been even clumsier than the USA's. It seems likely that Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland would respond to a new effort by Westminster to rebuild walls by trying out a few new walls of their own.
Why does the European Union need Great Britain?
They can replace the 64 million people with economic migrants from the Mid-East in less than 20 years.
They can replace the 64 million people with economic migrants from the Mid-East in less than 20 years.
12
If being in the EU were so great, why isn't the NYT Editorial Board advocating that the United States join up? Why not examine all those great benefits in light of our own country and see if it looks so shiny? It certainly would put an end to the Republican talk of "walls at the borders", and an end to many other things you currently decide on your own.
Also, "no right to help in policing the tunnel entrance in Calais, France,"... seriously? Who writes this? Even a 9 year old knows a tunnel has two ends.
Also, "no right to help in policing the tunnel entrance in Calais, France,"... seriously? Who writes this? Even a 9 year old knows a tunnel has two ends.
12
I think you're forgetting that the US is on a different continent. England really is -geographically part of Europe, whether they like it or not.
Yet another article which claims 'enormous benefits' to Britain as a consequence of belonging to the EU, without actually suggesting what the (net) benefits might have been! I have been visiting the UK and reading about European 'policies' for the past twenty years or so, as a consequence of meeting and marrying an English lass. For me, the one word which sums up their membership is 'humiliating'. The sooner they leave the Europeans to the mess (es) of their own making, the better off they will be.
13
The EU was a terrible idea and it's dying because the economic and migrant crises of recent years have demonstrated that it is incapable of making existential decisions in a timely manner. The British can show other countries the way out and beyond and give them the courage to go it alone.
13
Yugoslavia didn't work nor did the USSR and nor will the EU.
We are are wonderfully diverse world of countries, races, cultures and traditions which we should respect and preserve.
We are all tribal with a natural affinity to our own - we are not the human race but the human races and no amount of social engineering or wishful thinking will make it otherwise.
England should leave the EU and stay delightfully English.
We are are wonderfully diverse world of countries, races, cultures and traditions which we should respect and preserve.
We are all tribal with a natural affinity to our own - we are not the human race but the human races and no amount of social engineering or wishful thinking will make it otherwise.
England should leave the EU and stay delightfully English.
13
Unlike Yugoslavia, the EU doesn't pretend to be a nation, but rather an aggregate of nations with certain common interests.
'the EU doesn't pretend to be a nation' but its unelected, unaccountable bureaucrats feels free to dictate policy to member states.
4
The "unelected, unnaccountable bureaucrats" scam is such a wonderful lie... it prevents you from noticing that the EU régulations are voted by the parliament, and confirmed by the EU Council, where on most policies a qualified majority (more than half the countries representing more than half the population) allows for a decision, while a few policies are subject to individual countries veto.
When your government says "It's all the EU fault", it's lying, pure and simpe.
Now if you want to become another Norway, having to pay for benefiting from the EU market without having any say in its policies, please feel free to leave. This _would_ be a loss for hte EU, because as much as we like to diss on the UK they _did_, in the past, provide the EU with great ideas and great administrators, but the current UK policies are effectively anti-EU, so there is a chance that the UK leaving the EU would force it to actually decide if it should move forward or break up.
The debate this would necessarily create would allow for tighter political and econoical integration and would give some countries baiscally (Denmark, Finland, Swede, Poland, Hungaria) to choose between leaving the EU or actually participating.
So yes the UK leaving would be a shock but a loss? I think it would be an opportunity instead
When your government says "It's all the EU fault", it's lying, pure and simpe.
Now if you want to become another Norway, having to pay for benefiting from the EU market without having any say in its policies, please feel free to leave. This _would_ be a loss for hte EU, because as much as we like to diss on the UK they _did_, in the past, provide the EU with great ideas and great administrators, but the current UK policies are effectively anti-EU, so there is a chance that the UK leaving the EU would force it to actually decide if it should move forward or break up.
The debate this would necessarily create would allow for tighter political and econoical integration and would give some countries baiscally (Denmark, Finland, Swede, Poland, Hungaria) to choose between leaving the EU or actually participating.
So yes the UK leaving would be a shock but a loss? I think it would be an opportunity instead
The Brits should stay in the EU throw the crooked bankers out.
It's not xenophobia that makes so many British people skeptical. It's that it's hard to see a need for the EU except as a free-trade zone. It doesn't solve any problems for us. It doesn't make historical sense. Moreover, it's not democratic. Its laws come from unaccountable bureaucrats and its priorities from the whims of the German chancellor and the demands of French farmers. And we don't want to imitate how other countries in Europe deal with EU legislation they dislike: they ignore it. We want laws to obey, not for ornamentation or as a sign of aspiration. And our mental map of the world is different. To exaggerate to make the point, we're more likely to be able to locate Alice Springs on a map than Frankfurt. (Not long ago, there was no special EU queue in British airports, but there was a special queue for Australians, Canadians, Indians, Jamaicans and other Commonwealthers; many older people regret the change.) Expecting Britons to be instinctively pro-EU is less different than you might expect from expecting people in Newfoundland to want to be governed by Brussels and Angela Merkel. Also, it's pretty clear that our decisions to stay out of the Euro and Schengen were sensible and ought to have been imitated by other countries. We're pragmatic and issue-based, rather than utopian.
It's just a different history.
That being said, I'll probably vote to stay for economic reasons.
It's just a different history.
That being said, I'll probably vote to stay for economic reasons.
14
This is a maddening debate with no clear headed leadership. It is, in fact, impossible for the UK to disengage from the EU. Even if it formally left the Union it would need to strike an association agreement of some kind and the only one on the table would be one that gave reciprocal market and individual access to the UK in return for the same for all EU citizens. This would not solve the migration problem that is driving the UK hostility to the EU. If it chose not to develop an association agreement then it would see industry and services serving the EU including the prized City of London banking centre decimated with the knock-on implications for growth, employment and asset values. There is a very very dangerous vacuum of clear thinking in the UK which could end up catastrophic for the country.
4
Oh, yes, it would solve one aspect of non=EU migration: for Britain, which would be freed from Brussels' and Merkel's bullying to "do more" by taking in more non-European migrants no matter what its electorate wants; EU migrant benefits is really not that big a deal - it is the crowding, the pressure on resources, and the undeniable compression of the wages at the lower end of the scale due to huge influxes of cheaper labour. I don't think the City is going anywhere, any time soon, there is a huge array of other trading partners out there; and UK exports would go through the roof due to the downward pressure on prices. There is quite a bit more nuance here than you describe - France's economy is stagnant, even France is starting to murmur about exiting, and there are other unhappy countries in the EU besides the UK. When TTIP goes through, it will wipe out grass roots control or sovereignty of local environmental and labour regulations. There is more to this than money.
14
Ms. Renant you are the best "Opinion Writer" the NYT has, they should pay you for your thoughts and feature you weekly, you are so much better than all the other out of touch NY old columnists!
1
Britain exits fron Europe, will pave the way to Italy, Spain, Greece and all the countries that are stressed in all ways by the European bureaucracy. There could always be a way to cooperate, but with different money values that can be adequate to the needs of the various economies. Europeans are ripe enough that we should not fight each other with weapons, but we should have the right to fight for our way of living
15
Well said.
3
I have yet to read any cogent arguments for why the EU would suffer should Great Britain choose to part ways. This editorial highlights reasons why GB would lose out, but fails to do the same for the EU's side. Frankly, stating that "a “Brexit,” would deal a serious blow to a European Union already battered by an economic crisis and an immigration crisis", is a facile claim, not proof. What has GB contributed to truly solving either of these problems, except to flaunt the threat of leaving should the EU wish to implicate them further?
4
It is trivially obvious what Britain contributes - money. The UK is the 2nd largest net contributor, and until recently France actually made a profit from the EU via the CAP.
There is also the minor fact that Britain was right about the instability of the Euro, right about Schengen, and right about the migration crisis.
There is also the minor fact that Britain was right about the instability of the Euro, right about Schengen, and right about the migration crisis.
16
I suggest you check out the annual billions in funds the UK pours into the EU coffers. It isn't France that is serving as the off-load zone for most of Eastern Europe's unemployed and unemployable: it is the UK. The EU also suffers a huge prestige blow, and worst of all, as the EU well knows, the real dangerr of precedent arises: if the UK can do it, why not the other restive nations starting to resent being told what to do by Angela Merkel from behind Brussels' skirts? The AfD just passed 10% in Germany, the Eurosceptic parties in Denmark, Finland, and The Netherlands are all doing well. . .
If the EU had nothing to fear from the UK, it would never have kept up the farcical negotiations as much as it have. The EU really doesn't want the UK to vote OUT. Why don't you ask Jean-Claude Jumcker why?
If the UK exits, Paris and Marseilles can take all those extra Polish, Latvian, Lithuanian, Romanian, and Bulgarian workers. Enjoy.
If the EU had nothing to fear from the UK, it would never have kept up the farcical negotiations as much as it have. The EU really doesn't want the UK to vote OUT. Why don't you ask Jean-Claude Jumcker why?
If the UK exits, Paris and Marseilles can take all those extra Polish, Latvian, Lithuanian, Romanian, and Bulgarian workers. Enjoy.
18
We contributed a boat load of money for starters being one of the few net contributors.
The jobless in France, Spain etc moved to the UK because we could still provide jobs.
The German and Swedish approach to the refugees crisis has back-fired and was impractical to Britain. We have had massive immigration for the last decade and understand what pressure it puts on our services.
Don't blame Britain for questioning why it should be part of the EU.
The jobless in France, Spain etc moved to the UK because we could still provide jobs.
The German and Swedish approach to the refugees crisis has back-fired and was impractical to Britain. We have had massive immigration for the last decade and understand what pressure it puts on our services.
Don't blame Britain for questioning why it should be part of the EU.
4
Follow my hypothesis for a moment. The UK exits the EU, and then Scotland succeeds from the UK to stay in the EU, adopting the Euro. This works for the Tories b/c if Scotland breaks away the Labor Party will be reduced to a 2nd-class party in the remaining UK. The Conservatives then forge a trade agreement/open economic border with Scotland whereby goods and transit tariff-free, making Scotland the backdoor through which the UK and Europe can still interact. Euro Financial institutions move from London to Edinburgh-Glasgow-Aberdeen. Everyone wins.
5
First, I think you mean secedes. But the fact is, with the price of oil so low and the EU of today not nearly as appealing as the EU of five years ago or even two years ago, I doubt Scotland will go through with it. And why on earth would Scotland join the Eurozone right now?! Sturgeon's bluster doesn't play nearly as well with today as it might have in the past, before the EU displayed its incompetence and corruption. I read the UK press: you will see comments below the line from many Scots saying anti-EU feeling is rising there, too, and that most of the people they know, watching the EU's handling of the migrant crisis, its borders and security issues, and oil prices decline. reducing greatly the Scots' biggest economic asset, and I doubt they will rush to cut themselves off from all that funding that flows to them from Westminster . . . which is still a sore point with a good many Brits south of Berwick.
4
As in the U.S, it's tempting to deal the pompous unaccountable elites a humiliating defeat. The question is would it be self defeating as well?
6
After Rome fell political fragmentation caused 1500 years of constant warfare culminating in WWII. Beginning with the Coal & Steel community, integration seemed like a way out of the mess.
It appears that the process & evolution of European integration has been rushed too rapidly than was prudent, perhaps because the early stages were so successful. Europe has not been able to craft a constitution acceptable to all, the ECU appears to be a "bridge too far", in part because Europe is not ready for total and complete political integration. Going a bridge too far has undermined the concept of integration which in turn threatens peace and prosperity there.
Recently I attended a function with a collection Spanish professors. All of them shared concerns: too much power drifting to the center undermining local sovereignty & tradition, immigration, ECU & German hegemony on policy, but like the Greeks all valued highly being part of Europe.
I think Europe should create a cascading structural organization for integration from loosest to most cohesive: First you join the EEC (economic integration); then European Community (policy coordination); then European Union (policy cohesion); then European Currency Union; then Confederation; then Federation. States would then step their way up at their own pace & if necessary retreat a level to await again until the timing is right. Complete integration might take another 150 years, but years of peace and prosperity. No hurries, no worries.
It appears that the process & evolution of European integration has been rushed too rapidly than was prudent, perhaps because the early stages were so successful. Europe has not been able to craft a constitution acceptable to all, the ECU appears to be a "bridge too far", in part because Europe is not ready for total and complete political integration. Going a bridge too far has undermined the concept of integration which in turn threatens peace and prosperity there.
Recently I attended a function with a collection Spanish professors. All of them shared concerns: too much power drifting to the center undermining local sovereignty & tradition, immigration, ECU & German hegemony on policy, but like the Greeks all valued highly being part of Europe.
I think Europe should create a cascading structural organization for integration from loosest to most cohesive: First you join the EEC (economic integration); then European Community (policy coordination); then European Union (policy cohesion); then European Currency Union; then Confederation; then Federation. States would then step their way up at their own pace & if necessary retreat a level to await again until the timing is right. Complete integration might take another 150 years, but years of peace and prosperity. No hurries, no worries.
3
I say let them go.
From the start the UK has been opposed to the EU project, in no small part due to raw xenophobia. They demand special status and concessions from the continent. By giving in Brussels opens the door to other countries demanding the same, so the UK undermines the EU project.
Three consequences would flow from the so-called "Brexit."
1). Britain's economy would suffer a body blow. 44% of Britain's exports go to the EU and 54% of is imports come from the EU. In contrast, EU exports to the UK represent about 3% of its trade volume.
So who needs whom?
2). The UK would break up. It is almost certain that a "Brexit" would prompt a new independence referendum in Scotland, which is very pro-EU, and that this time it would be successful. Of all the promises made to Scotland about "maximum devolution" to secure a "no" vote in the 2015 referendum, London has kept none. This is why the Scottish National Party swept the board in the last general election. The Scots are primed to leave the UK, and a Brexit would force their hand.
3) The rest of the EU could proceed on its path to further, beneficial integration without the constant roadblocks, harping, and opposition of the UK. Meanwhile the UK would be no less subject to trade rules made in Brussels but would have given up its seat at the decision-making table.
So, I say, enjoy! Have a nice time on the outside looking in. The rest of the EU will get on just fine without the UK.
Bon voyage and Aufwiedersehen!
From the start the UK has been opposed to the EU project, in no small part due to raw xenophobia. They demand special status and concessions from the continent. By giving in Brussels opens the door to other countries demanding the same, so the UK undermines the EU project.
Three consequences would flow from the so-called "Brexit."
1). Britain's economy would suffer a body blow. 44% of Britain's exports go to the EU and 54% of is imports come from the EU. In contrast, EU exports to the UK represent about 3% of its trade volume.
So who needs whom?
2). The UK would break up. It is almost certain that a "Brexit" would prompt a new independence referendum in Scotland, which is very pro-EU, and that this time it would be successful. Of all the promises made to Scotland about "maximum devolution" to secure a "no" vote in the 2015 referendum, London has kept none. This is why the Scottish National Party swept the board in the last general election. The Scots are primed to leave the UK, and a Brexit would force their hand.
3) The rest of the EU could proceed on its path to further, beneficial integration without the constant roadblocks, harping, and opposition of the UK. Meanwhile the UK would be no less subject to trade rules made in Brussels but would have given up its seat at the decision-making table.
So, I say, enjoy! Have a nice time on the outside looking in. The rest of the EU will get on just fine without the UK.
Bon voyage and Aufwiedersehen!
29
The youth unemployment rate in Spain and Italy is above 50%. An entire generation is being disenfranchised by Germany's beggar-thy-neigbour economic domination.
If that is your 'beneficial integration' then you are welcome to it.
If that is your 'beneficial integration' then you are welcome to it.
12
Total nonsense. The UK is second largest contributor to the EU's coffers, and I doubt that the economic integration would be cast aside overnight. Flown on an Airbus lately? The wings are built in the UK and the engines. If the Scots had gained independence they would now be bust due to their over reliance on oil revenues, nor is there any guarantee that they would benefit from EU membership as they would have to accept the Euro. The Scots HAVE had all the devolved powers, and can now set their own tax for example. And unlike you, I live in the UK 40 miles from the Scotland
2
You could also remind the original poster that the likelihood that the Scots will rush to join the stagnant Eurozone, that it takes a five year wait to join the EU, that the price of oil, the Scots' biggest economic asset, is sinking, Greece is imploding, and even in Germany, Eurosceptic parties are rising in the polls.
Wee Nic talks a good game, but neither Scotland nor the EU are quite what they were some years ago. And regardless of the EU, there are still a great many Scots who feel quite a bit more British than European. The SNP lost the referendum before the migrant crisis and the price of oil sank and Greece imploded. I doubt they'll be going anywhere with those realities now before them.
Wee Nic talks a good game, but neither Scotland nor the EU are quite what they were some years ago. And regardless of the EU, there are still a great many Scots who feel quite a bit more British than European. The SNP lost the referendum before the migrant crisis and the price of oil sank and Greece imploded. I doubt they'll be going anywhere with those realities now before them.
3
You have to envy the Brits, they have an opportunity to dump a whole layer of government and a massive bureaucracy, quit the EU.
28
What was the purpose of the European Union? Supposedly to strength cooperation and reduce economic barriers. This could and should have been done without creating any governance mechanism. Cooperation can continue, trade barriers can stay down, and travel among nations can continue with minimal restrictions without nations losing their sovereignty. The EU is an essentially anti-democratic institution and needs to be moved on from.
16
We have reached our own kind of 1860 South Carolina moment. If we secede who will follow? The EU is an undemocratic bureaucracy that benefits a particular elite. It's very nature means that patriotism, the defence of unique cultures, the idea of belonging to like minded groups based on family and race, are nothing. The EU has very doubtful economic benefits for the majority of citizens but more important than that is the open door it is providing for the rapid islamification of Europe. When Merkel of Germany, finally gives all those feckless young migrant men citizenship, we in Britain know exactly where they will head. Sorry but we do not need them and we certainly don't want them.
Our European colleagues frequently try to belittle us i.e. we are less than 1% of the worlds population, we will be isolated in a globalised economy, nobody will trade with us etc. They forget we are the world's fifth largest economy, a nuclear power with global reach, which equals influence and we are one of the biggest markets for their produce. Most of the business WE do in the EU is with only one country and that is Ireland.
I hope our weak Prime Minister totally fails to "sell" his zero deal to my fellow Brits. As for the EU there are many who would echo the words of Winston Churchill when Germany previously attempted a united Europe under its auspices, "What kind of people do they think we are? Is it possible they do not realize that we shall never cease to persevere against them".
Our European colleagues frequently try to belittle us i.e. we are less than 1% of the worlds population, we will be isolated in a globalised economy, nobody will trade with us etc. They forget we are the world's fifth largest economy, a nuclear power with global reach, which equals influence and we are one of the biggest markets for their produce. Most of the business WE do in the EU is with only one country and that is Ireland.
I hope our weak Prime Minister totally fails to "sell" his zero deal to my fellow Brits. As for the EU there are many who would echo the words of Winston Churchill when Germany previously attempted a united Europe under its auspices, "What kind of people do they think we are? Is it possible they do not realize that we shall never cease to persevere against them".
33
Erm, the war ended 71 years ago, the Empire a few decades later.
Time to wake up and smell the tea.
Enjoy life on the outside looking in!
"Good night, and good luck."
Time to wake up and smell the tea.
Enjoy life on the outside looking in!
"Good night, and good luck."
3
The EU was spawned because of WW2 to ensure that the two historically competitive powers of Germany and France formed a new relationship. I have no problem with the industrious people of Germany. However, the disproportionate and negative German influence on the Union is plain to see. The treatment of some of the "siesta" states like Greece and the mass influx of migrants can all be laid at Merkel's door. Germany itself is soon going to be shaken to the core as dissent grows there because of mass immigration and the slowing of the economy. It is all too often forgotten that after Germany, the UK is the next largest contributor to the EU Budget by far.
France is a withering power where nationalism is increasing and grass roots rejection of the EU is growing. The British position will very soon become the position of a huge number of disillusioned people across Europe.
France is a withering power where nationalism is increasing and grass roots rejection of the EU is growing. The British position will very soon become the position of a huge number of disillusioned people across Europe.
7
@midendlander: Stand firm and vote your interests. The 1%, media, corporatists, open borders enablers are all wanting an agenda that doesn't benefit the average citizen.
5
Britain's latest request is yet another indication that the Anglo-Saxon vision of a EU as a loose economic arrangement is incompatible with a Federal Europe (not to mention Scotland). The fact of the matter is that the EU must either march forward and make its institutions supranational or it will disappear. You cant have a system conceived to accommodate the 6 original nations work for 28. As a Union, Europe is the most powerful economic block in the world but as individual sovereign nations, none (even Germany) can measure up. The Tusk-Cameron tinkering only adds to a degrading status-quote that is unsustainable. Let Britain go.
1
For the last time = most Americans have no clue as to how Scottish-English politics really play out. The Scots referendum went for remaining before the EU started to implode, and before the price of oil began to fall so far so fast. Scotland gets huge amounts of money from the rest of the UK, mostly from English taxpayers. The Eurozone is stagnant-they just cut their growth predictions . . . again. I assure you, the Scots are going nowhere any time soon.
3
Dim recollections of the bonfires on both sides of the English Channel from my childhood 45 years ago, and the realization that the Common Market, as it was quaintly called then, existed for economic reasons only. Now that the European Community has become a superimposed polity of its own, dictating law and policy downward on the parliamentary bodies and people of its constituents, Britain wants to exercise its right to exit. I applaud this choice, because it points out hope to the United States, who may similarly opt out of its innumerable Free Trade Agreements that have done nothing but cause that giant sucking sound Ross Perot predicted...
12
PROS & CONS Either way, Britain will have social and economic challenges and still be a neighbor of the EU. I wonder whether a referendum would be in favor of withdrawal from the EU or not. The UK held a vote on whether to stay united or split up. Voters chose staying together. They may well choose that on a referendum on whether to remain with the EU or leave.
If the only way to save the EU is to allow each member to pick and choose a cafeteria of benefits then what is the point of having an EU agreement in the first place?
Instead of having one EU agreement, there will be 28, the same type of mix and match that existed before the EU took form.
It's very difficult for ego driven politicians to admit they made a mistake, but that is what happened to the EU. If Britain exits and paves the way, it will be easier for the other members to gracefully follow suit.
Instead of having one EU agreement, there will be 28, the same type of mix and match that existed before the EU took form.
It's very difficult for ego driven politicians to admit they made a mistake, but that is what happened to the EU. If Britain exits and paves the way, it will be easier for the other members to gracefully follow suit.
4
The EU began as a response after WWII to the endless warfare that plagued Europe for centuries. Since then, it's grown into a huge bureaucracy that issues biblical-length regulations to qualify the biblical-length regulations it has already issued.
The UK should leave and begin the inevitable break-up of an institution that has far outlived its usefulness.
The UK should leave and begin the inevitable break-up of an institution that has far outlived its usefulness.
4
You are probably right that the EU as constituted to-day, once needed, is no longer needed today. Pax Britannia has been replaced by the Pax Americana and The UK is now almost a state of the US. Let the EU be turned into a Customs Union and get rid of the Euro. The way that Europe is being invaded these days it will have Sharia Law soon. That is the real problem!
1
"Britain never adopted the euro and proudly uses its own currency."
I have never seen the New York Times editorial board use the word "proudly" to describe any action by a mature democracy, least of all the US.
I have never seen the New York Times editorial board use the word "proudly" to describe any action by a mature democracy, least of all the US.
12
From the very beginning of the European union movement, England has tried to oppose it, and when forced to enter it by economic pressure, has tried to weaken it and reduced it to a simple custom union. It was instrumental in the rapid expansion from the original 6 to the 28 present number so it’s government could be as inefficient and slow as possible (and was very much in favor of Turkey’s membership, which would be the straw that breaks the camel’s back).
Brexit would be a terrible blow to the City, because a good part of the financial markets in the Euro currency would move to the continent. It might speed up the breakup of the United Kingdom ,because Scotland wants to stay in Europe . It would come at the worst possible time for the continental Europe which is still in recession (except for Germany) and is in the middle of a refugee crisis of epic proportion, but in the long term it might be the best thing that could happen for the rest of us . We could take care of our common interests and work towards our common goals without sharing the negotiation table with somebody who is constantly trying to sabotage any progress towards integration.
Brexit would be a terrible blow to the City, because a good part of the financial markets in the Euro currency would move to the continent. It might speed up the breakup of the United Kingdom ,because Scotland wants to stay in Europe . It would come at the worst possible time for the continental Europe which is still in recession (except for Germany) and is in the middle of a refugee crisis of epic proportion, but in the long term it might be the best thing that could happen for the rest of us . We could take care of our common interests and work towards our common goals without sharing the negotiation table with somebody who is constantly trying to sabotage any progress towards integration.
14
Spoken like a true French... And I actually agree. Let them leave .
1
Agreed! When Germany and France are on the same side, who needs England!
1
Sorry. It is the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. The UK for short and not England! Imagine me calling the Hexagon Corsica......
If it happens Merkels naive a-historical and sociologically ignorant refugee policy must take some of the blame.
41
We're leaving.
end of.
end of.
20
Cool. Best wishes. Hope Scotland stays. Lovely place you got there.
The quicker the better!
1
Seeing as the UK, the USA and the rest of the coalition of the stupid are directly responsible for the refugee problems, it would be nice if they would do something to help the rest of Europe.
The UK doesn't deserve the EU, and it would be much better off without their temper tantrums and their periodic tossing of their toys,out of the pram.
The UK doesn't deserve the EU, and it would be much better off without their temper tantrums and their periodic tossing of their toys,out of the pram.
11
Really? Nothing to do with Russia's role in the Syrian civil war, or the 700 year old civil war between Shia and Sunni Muslims then?
7
The impact of Britain's departure from the EU would be nearly nil. The EU is of interest primarily to self-important diplomats and the sinecures they support. In terms of governance, the only response the EU institutions have is to call a series of ineffectual "emergency meetings" that yield inane resolutions of solidarity. The EU should stick to its areas of expertise, such as regulating the curvature of bananas and the energy efficiency of toasters. Proud master of the seas that it once was, Britain gains little indeed by sailing with such a ship of fools.
16
The times wishes Britain to remain in to gratify and enable the open borders crowd.
17
Could we imagine for one second Americans being prepared to subordinate Congress to NAFTA? The issue is sovereignty. There are many Britons who would be prepared to make a certain economic sacrifice to restore the integrity of the nation's democracy and the accountability and sovereignty of its Parliament.
It's also not at all clear how exiting the EU would affect the UK's membership of NATO; Norway is a European NATO member that it not part of the EU.
It's also not at all clear how exiting the EU would affect the UK's membership of NATO; Norway is a European NATO member that it not part of the EU.
11
You hit the nail squarely. Follow my hypothesis for a moment. The UK exits the EU, and then Scotland succeeds from the UK to stay in the EU, adopting the Euro. This works for the Tories b/c if Scotland breaks away the Labor Party will be reduced to a 2nd-class party in the remaining UK. The Conservatives then forge a trade agreement/open economic border with Scotland whereby goods and transit tariff-free, making Scotland the backdoor through which the UK and Europe can still interact. Euro Financial institutions move from London to Edinburgh-Glasgow-Aberdeen. Everyone wins.
3
As a non-EU citizen living in the EU reading these comments from non-EU residents makes it clear to me that Americans in particular have only a superficial understanding of the EU. So, to put it in perspective, take Texas and secession as an example. The U.K. And Texas are similar situations. Texas hates living up to rules it didn't invent there. Britain is exactly the same way. It is a politically right-wing Ayn Rand philosophy that all men are islands and that union is a bad thing. Would Americans accept a Texas that wanted its own currency, wanted its own ability to opt out of federal law? No.
I cannot imagine a British consultancy, manufacturer, airline or any other business with close ties wanting Britain out of the common market. Once they are out, they will have to negotiate free trade agreements, Brits will need visas to work in other European countries, they will no longer stroll in as locals flashing a passport.
Will Brits serve coffee in Starbucks in the City of London when Hungarians and Poles are no longer able to come take poor paying service jobs? Not anytime soon.
It's easy to complain about the imperfections. But when access to cheap labor and the Euro-regulations they complain about go away, they'll start complaining about the unintended consequences the Brexit will bring.
Britain got it wrong in Iraq. And they've got it wrong on the Brexit. They've been a lousy partner in Europe. Maybe they should try a new tact: be a stronger partner in Europe
I cannot imagine a British consultancy, manufacturer, airline or any other business with close ties wanting Britain out of the common market. Once they are out, they will have to negotiate free trade agreements, Brits will need visas to work in other European countries, they will no longer stroll in as locals flashing a passport.
Will Brits serve coffee in Starbucks in the City of London when Hungarians and Poles are no longer able to come take poor paying service jobs? Not anytime soon.
It's easy to complain about the imperfections. But when access to cheap labor and the Euro-regulations they complain about go away, they'll start complaining about the unintended consequences the Brexit will bring.
Britain got it wrong in Iraq. And they've got it wrong on the Brexit. They've been a lousy partner in Europe. Maybe they should try a new tact: be a stronger partner in Europe
17
The EU got it wrong on Schengen, on the migration crisis, on the Euro, on the bank bailouts and on the Balkans. How about some accountability?
14
J, "wrong" is a value judgement.
Many people still think that they got a lot of it right.
GBR no longer rules a quarter of the world and NYC has replaced London is the center of the Western world.
Many people still think that they got a lot of it right.
GBR no longer rules a quarter of the world and NYC has replaced London is the center of the Western world.
Only the losers will lose. The vast majority, including the British, will gain by their retaining their SOVEREIGNTY.
8
Britain wants all the benefits of EU membership with none of the duties or obligations and it seems that some of the EU leaders are happy to bend over backwards to give it to them. Why?
Britain doesn't like immigrants living off its social welfare system and because of that wants out? Let them go. They will likely be clamoring to come back within a decade as long as the EU holds a hard line with them on trade. Don't want to play ball? Want to take your ball and go home? Then go. But don't let them pick and choose the rules they want to ignore... when I was a kid we'd call that cheating... and it's still cheating...
Britain doesn't like immigrants living off its social welfare system and because of that wants out? Let them go. They will likely be clamoring to come back within a decade as long as the EU holds a hard line with them on trade. Don't want to play ball? Want to take your ball and go home? Then go. But don't let them pick and choose the rules they want to ignore... when I was a kid we'd call that cheating... and it's still cheating...
11
'none of the duties or obligations '
Britain is the second largest net contributor to the EU and the only country to faithfully implement its laws. If that is 'cheating' then it only shows just how ludicrous and distorted the EU has become.
Britain is the second largest net contributor to the EU and the only country to faithfully implement its laws. If that is 'cheating' then it only shows just how ludicrous and distorted the EU has become.
23
You are wasting your breath - most Americans haven't the slightest idea how much the UK contributes to the EU. If it exits, the other EU nations, notably France and Germany, as those with bigger economies, will have to pick up the slack. Nor have most Americans any idea of the power the European Court has to supersede national laws. If you told Americans that the EC decided to overturn a ruling by the Supreme Court, they would riot in the streets, but they think it is perfectly fine for what was initially just a trading market to set up courts that overturn Parliamentary decisions in London - like the right to deport convicted foreign criminals.
1
I've always thought it would be interesting if the UK voted out on the EU and in turn joined the US as the 51st state. In hindsight it wouldn't be all that crazy..we have faster communication and travel compared to the 1700s...just it would be vice versa..and different and kind of interesting for a bit maybe.
In reality UK would be fine on it's own if not better. If anything the EU has slowed UK down with regulation. I suppose the only risk is is Scotland voting to leave the UK. Suppose there are ways to address that.
In reality UK would be fine on it's own if not better. If anything the EU has slowed UK down with regulation. I suppose the only risk is is Scotland voting to leave the UK. Suppose there are ways to address that.
9
It's an interesting thought but then you miss the point. Why would we want to be part of another large bureaucratic union. Trade is fine but we are quite happy governing ourselves.
I love America but you are as different to us as France or Spain.
I love America but you are as different to us as France or Spain.
2
It's just a fun thought. I get the initiative and hope you success as I think this can bring much needed strength not just to UK but the world economy. Love you guys too and look forward to my visit next week to Smithfield. Hog's head soup I shall attempt to impress my friends with!
Britain isn't a "partner" in the European Union - it won't adopt the Euro, won't participate in Schengen, and I keep hearing Cameron and other British politicians about "renegotiating the agreement". Perhaps it is time to turn the tide - after all, countries like France and Germany participate in the EU to a full extent, and negotiate their needs "from within". Perhaps the EU making it clear to the UK government (I am not convinced the British populace is as anti-EU as it has been made out to be, British expats run their own radio and TV stations in Mediterranean areas) their country can either become a full participating member of the EU, or take a hike, and do their own thing. After all, the only other partners Britain has are white Anglo-Saxon Commonwealth members like New Zealand, Australia, and Canada, and their love affair with the United States is just that - we've seen in the complete absence of American support during the Falklands War where America's allegiance is, and the sooner the Brits understand America isn't a partner to anyone they don't need, the more they'll be able to stop dreaming about the Empire. At this point, England is a floating Indian/German car factory - exit the EU, that'll all go away. G
34
The UK had the 7th largest industrial output last year, and has Europe's only expanding car manufacturing industry. The USA is the UK's largest export market.
Equally, the huge Japanese plants (which you seem to be unaware of) have already said they would stay regardless of the vote's outcome.
Equally, the huge Japanese plants (which you seem to be unaware of) have already said they would stay regardless of the vote's outcome.
9
"...the sooner the Brits understand America isn't a partner to anyone they don't need" Excuse me, when has Britain, or anyone else, done otherwise? Since the dawn of time, every nation, empire, and superpower, including Britain, has done what it perceived to be in its own interest, and hang the consequences for anyone else. It's quite irrational, if convenient, to expect the US to behave differently from anyone else, including the Brits, who dominated the world for three centuries for their own benefit and no one else's, except incidentally.
3
Menno, let's be clear we don't dream about the empire. For the most part the people of Britain lived in poverty and the empire did little to help that. I don't remember the empire and probably neither did my parents.
We do participate in the EU, we are a net contributor to it and for example help fund the construction of infrastructure in places like Poland.
Your statement that we only partner with other white Anglo-Saxon is as misguided as it is insulting. We have long traded with many parts of the world and ironically one of the arguments for leaving is so we can make our own trading arrangements with the rest of the world.
We do participate in the EU, we are a net contributor to it and for example help fund the construction of infrastructure in places like Poland.
Your statement that we only partner with other white Anglo-Saxon is as misguided as it is insulting. We have long traded with many parts of the world and ironically one of the arguments for leaving is so we can make our own trading arrangements with the rest of the world.
Britain ought to remain a part of the EU. Then when the college-kids-crusade led by Sen. Senators is successful, the U.S. will be eligible to join it. And all of us will have single-payer health care and free college education and manna from heaven and ….
3
... and free college educations ...
1
Meant to write Sanders. I shouldn't be writing these things in the middle of the night with one eye shut and the other one closed.
2
Britain strikes me as operating under the delusion of her evaporated power. An island nation, long dependent on external markets, Britain in the EU benefits from participation in a common economic zone of developed nations that receive well over a hundred billion pounds in exports from her--critically, where she now lacks the captive markets of her former colonial empire.
As for immigration, the irony of the biggest coloniser of the modern era whining about people coming into their country and messing things up should be lost on no one. "What does this have to do with us?" the British public asks, about people fleeing from a region whose catastrophic borders and ill-suited regimes she installed to suit her economic interests.
It's almost comically amoral.
The EU should consider letting her go and then shutting her out. Perhaps a break up would give perfidious Albion a more realistic sense of self.
As for immigration, the irony of the biggest coloniser of the modern era whining about people coming into their country and messing things up should be lost on no one. "What does this have to do with us?" the British public asks, about people fleeing from a region whose catastrophic borders and ill-suited regimes she installed to suit her economic interests.
It's almost comically amoral.
The EU should consider letting her go and then shutting her out. Perhaps a break up would give perfidious Albion a more realistic sense of self.
56
You'll find that it isn't just Britain who are "whining about people coming to their country", many countries in Europe are as well as Americans.
5
Oh please, the UK has a large trade deficit with the EU and large trade surplus with the rest of the world. The idea that EU membership boosts net trade is factually nonsensical.
Equally the UK has contributed more to Syrian refugees than any other country.
Lastly, the empire is ancient history and anyone justifying mass migration with that argument needs to look a bit more closely at the USA's history versus its current, hypocritical, refugee policy.
Equally the UK has contributed more to Syrian refugees than any other country.
Lastly, the empire is ancient history and anyone justifying mass migration with that argument needs to look a bit more closely at the USA's history versus its current, hypocritical, refugee policy.
7
Thats certainly one way of looking at it. Another is that this island nation is the biggest market for European goods. I'm sure European businesses will be absolutely fine with suddenly having to pay additional tariffs to export to us. See how long that situation lasts. Oh and this little island has put together more multi-billion pound trade deals in the last 12 months with emerging markets like India and China that the rest of the EU nations put together.
As for immigration, we simply have a different approach. We believe it is better to provide financial support to the camps in Turkey, Lebanon and Jordan and process and take refugees seeking asylum directly from those camps, for whom we are the single largest contributor of international aid by far, compared to any other nation, European or otherwise.
As for the EU considering shutting us out, they already did, long ago. We remain the second largest financial contributor to the EU and in return have virtually zero influence, because at heart the EU is simply a Franco-German love-in, and most other members simply do what they're told for fear of losing their precious subsidies. The Euro is failing, Schengen is proving to be a bad idea and no-one wants to listen to us, so what's the point in staying?
As for immigration, we simply have a different approach. We believe it is better to provide financial support to the camps in Turkey, Lebanon and Jordan and process and take refugees seeking asylum directly from those camps, for whom we are the single largest contributor of international aid by far, compared to any other nation, European or otherwise.
As for the EU considering shutting us out, they already did, long ago. We remain the second largest financial contributor to the EU and in return have virtually zero influence, because at heart the EU is simply a Franco-German love-in, and most other members simply do what they're told for fear of losing their precious subsidies. The Euro is failing, Schengen is proving to be a bad idea and no-one wants to listen to us, so what's the point in staying?
10
It is not just a matter of bringing to an end Brussels and Strasbourg dictating terms to London. It is long past time that Westminster stopped dictating to Edinburgh, Cardiff, Belfast and Truro.
When Edward Heath was prime minister, I helped my mother campaign for the entry of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland into what was then known informally in the UK as the Common Market. The UK joined the Common Market on 1 January 1973.
I have supported, written about and spoken out for the concept of a comprehensive European community ever since. Nevertheless, all good things come to an end and I believe that it is now time for the UK to leave the EU.
It is also time to dissolve the UK, and for England, Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales to go it alone. Eventually, Cornwall should split away from England. Finally, England should split into its natural parts, which in 2016 still correspond closely to the Heptarchy of the seven Anglo-Saxon kingdoms of Northumbria, Mercia, East Anglia, Essex, Kent, Sussex and Wessex.
When the UK has come to its natural end, then the newly resurrected nation states that once comprised it can decide whether or not to apply to join the EU on their own terms as sovereign states.
When Edward Heath was prime minister, I helped my mother campaign for the entry of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland into what was then known informally in the UK as the Common Market. The UK joined the Common Market on 1 January 1973.
I have supported, written about and spoken out for the concept of a comprehensive European community ever since. Nevertheless, all good things come to an end and I believe that it is now time for the UK to leave the EU.
It is also time to dissolve the UK, and for England, Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales to go it alone. Eventually, Cornwall should split away from England. Finally, England should split into its natural parts, which in 2016 still correspond closely to the Heptarchy of the seven Anglo-Saxon kingdoms of Northumbria, Mercia, East Anglia, Essex, Kent, Sussex and Wessex.
When the UK has come to its natural end, then the newly resurrected nation states that once comprised it can decide whether or not to apply to join the EU on their own terms as sovereign states.
5
I have been following this issue of a Brexit before the term was ever coined, and I seriously doubt that it would pose quite the existential problem that our Anglo-oriented pundits would have us believe. Great Britain has always kept more than an arm's distance from EU policy matters, except for those which directly affect it. We could have used Britain's voice on matters of freeing up markets but it was silent. At the same time, London has offered incredible tax breaks to French and other European businesses who agree to set up shop in GB. And GB's harsh anti-labor laws have helped worsen the conditions of working people throughout the EU. If the land of Albion were to leave the EU, that country's businesses would lose their easy access to European markets, which would be a bad thing for Great Britain, but not so bad for the vast majority of Europeans!
17
What are curious editorial, and like much of the argument in favour of the EU an Euro, devoid of substantive facts or benefits. What is clear is the EU has history of walking all over local national views, ignoring democratic votes, centralising and destroying local economic flexibility leading to massive youth unemployment, proven toothless and inept in policing borders, basically following along the latest Germanic view on anything - be it forcing Greece to comply with bankers wishes or abandoning immigration processes. Quite simply Britain can enjoy free trade with Europe without the Euro or EU membership and still control its destiny.
16
The commenters who blame the French-German alliance should take a look at the March 14, 2015’s edition of The Economist which confirmed what was known for at least a year i.e. the dire state of the British infrastructure and economy, trailing behind France, Canada, Germany and U.S. The Economist also noted the fact that “The French could take Friday off and still produce more than Britons do in a week.”
The influence of the UK on European geopolitics has been also heading south, as a result of the self-inflicted fellow-traveling posture and narrow inward-turned vision of British politicians.
The UK has an outstanding potential to be the engine of the EU knowledge economy with a competent civil service, sound education system and financial expertise that are the envy of most countries. Rather than opting out, it has far more to gain by investing in shaping a better EU and a closer integration with the Union, as did the Irish Republic whose economy and geopolitcal influence are fast growing in and beyond the Euro zone.
The UK has legitimate concerns but keeping the country under the new notwithstanding covenants proposed by Donald Tusk would weaken the Union and set a regressive precedent toward an inequitable unworkable variable-geometry EU, which is the dream of the issue riders of the Front National and their counterparts throughout the continent who like to surf on such minefields.
A field trip to Dublin would be beneficial to members of the UK Parliament.
The influence of the UK on European geopolitics has been also heading south, as a result of the self-inflicted fellow-traveling posture and narrow inward-turned vision of British politicians.
The UK has an outstanding potential to be the engine of the EU knowledge economy with a competent civil service, sound education system and financial expertise that are the envy of most countries. Rather than opting out, it has far more to gain by investing in shaping a better EU and a closer integration with the Union, as did the Irish Republic whose economy and geopolitcal influence are fast growing in and beyond the Euro zone.
The UK has legitimate concerns but keeping the country under the new notwithstanding covenants proposed by Donald Tusk would weaken the Union and set a regressive precedent toward an inequitable unworkable variable-geometry EU, which is the dream of the issue riders of the Front National and their counterparts throughout the continent who like to surf on such minefields.
A field trip to Dublin would be beneficial to members of the UK Parliament.
27
'the dire state of the British infrastructure and economy, trailing behind France, Canada, Germany and U.S. '
The Economist said nothing of the sort.
'“The French could take Friday off and still produce more than Britons do in a week.”'
And if you include the unemployed into productivity calculations, rather than pretend they don't exist - or more accurately, ignore the fact that lower paid jobs are working cash in hand and therefore making a mockery of productivity calculations - then you might have a meaningful statistic.
The Economist said nothing of the sort.
'“The French could take Friday off and still produce more than Britons do in a week.”'
And if you include the unemployed into productivity calculations, rather than pretend they don't exist - or more accurately, ignore the fact that lower paid jobs are working cash in hand and therefore making a mockery of productivity calculations - then you might have a meaningful statistic.
4
The idea that Ireland demonstrates the benefits of the EU membership is laughable. The Irish debt crisis was partly fuelled by EU involvement in their banking system and the resulting 'solution' involved the Irish people paying tens of billions of euro to the EU, in part to save European banks from facing up to their own bad loans. The Irish people have suffered hugely in response. They may be seen as the poster child of a good EU member obediently paying their debts, but this has come at a huge cost in emigration, unemployment, and the loss of basic services like schools, police and hospitals. Just look at the rhetoric surrounding the current Irish election to see what the Irish people feel about the last few years.
5
That would be the same Ireland who lost another chunk of young people looking for work in other countries in the last recession, and the Ireland that lives off of taking in the fictitious headquarters of global giants for tax purposes? What should the UK learn from Ireland? Increased poverty of working people and how to cater to the wealthy .1%?
5
De Gaulle knew it. He knew England would be trouble. He knew they would cherry pick what they want and never join fully. Let them go. Britain loses if they exit. Europe will be fine without them. And soon the Scots will leave the Union leaving the Brits playing with themselves. It is all written. C'est la vie.
5
De Gaulle hated the English but I bet he's turning in his grave now the EU has become a political union, something he didn't want.
4
"But if it pulls out of the union, it will have no more say on European migration policies" - pardon me, but as a member of the EU, how much say did the UK have in Merkel's decision to mount a soapbox and sing from it Eastwards "send me your poor" - this was a unilateral decision based on one country's ageing demographic, that to my mind at least, has spectacularly backfired.
For 25 years I was pro-Europe, but for all the talk of the UK's lack of gusto to integrate, it pails in comparisons to France and Southern Europe's foot dragging in implementing much needed structural reforms.
If the EU 2.0 is to succeed, it requires less input from ideologues and more emphasis on commerce and trading.
For 25 years I was pro-Europe, but for all the talk of the UK's lack of gusto to integrate, it pails in comparisons to France and Southern Europe's foot dragging in implementing much needed structural reforms.
If the EU 2.0 is to succeed, it requires less input from ideologues and more emphasis on commerce and trading.
56
This will put half of Europe in poverty, marginalize Britain and drag on the global economy.
1
The loss of control of refugees throughout the EU, but particularly in Germany, is an excellent reason all by itself for Brexit.
15
If Britain left the EU there would be no one to stop Germany from taking over Europe which would really be a shame after all of the sacrifice of the last century.
1
Germany is much diminished. When the bullied Greece and destroyed their economy for years to come as a signal that no nation would leave the Euro, that was as the main engine of growth in the EU. With the illegal migrant crisis, not one nation has agreed to take in "their share" of refugees, despite Germany's influence. Merkel's disastrous decision led to the shut-down of the Schengen travel zone.
Germany can no longer dictate terms to others, at least for a while.
Germany can no longer dictate terms to others, at least for a while.
1
I fully expect the next World War will be an economic war and don't expect there will be a Britain in ten years. There will of course always be an England and I expect England will be closely partnered by the USA. I suspect what is now the EU will be joined by Canada, Japan,Australia, New Zeeland, Scotland, Wales and Ireland and this union will be the new Switzerland in the economic wars.
While the USA, Russia and China fight for economic supremacy in the developing world the EU will develop its own smaller sustainable economy based on a common currency, a strong social safety net and mutual cooperation.
I don't know how to define winners and losers but I suspect that things will be very different.
While the USA, Russia and China fight for economic supremacy in the developing world the EU will develop its own smaller sustainable economy based on a common currency, a strong social safety net and mutual cooperation.
I don't know how to define winners and losers but I suspect that things will be very different.
2
I believe Europe would be better off without Britain. It's values are too different. Where's the British willingness to take in refugees, for example? Britain is for Britain and little else.
3
Britain IS taking in refugees.
1
Wrong Pancho! Britain has had almost 300,000 illegal aliens penetrating her borders in the last 10 years per year. That's 3.3M people this tiny island can no longer afford to house, clothe and feed!
Funny I don't see you criticising Australia who has an extremely anti-alien policy!
Funny I don't see you criticising Australia who has an extremely anti-alien policy!
5
Dera Pancho. The UK has always taken in refugees, Syria included. We absorb 165,000 migrants from the EU every year (1.5 Poles for example) and have provide the bulk of grants to assist the UN in Lebannon refugee camps. Merkel took a unilateral decision with dreadful consequences and then expected all other EU states to take the responsibility. The UK now have a population of 65 million and will exceed Germany in 10 years
Not everybody !. In fact as per the British mentality and its own ability to function as the UK its absurd demands, the problems it face with a very large undocumented immigrants who live in squalor and the rest of the Royals, Aristocrats, upper classes high on the hog . Not to mention the British having not much of an industry of its own, the nations infrastructure, NHS, cost of living, GPD, the freeloading House of Lords, London itself all owned by the Arabs, and other pitfalls , the EU Continentals will be far better off without UK's uppity attitude.
Britain to leave EU will wind up being an isolated Island in the North Sea. In fact more then anything EC is a life line to UK.
Britain to leave EU will wind up being an isolated Island in the North Sea. In fact more then anything EC is a life line to UK.
You've been too long on the wine, Winemaster.
One of the reasons for the EU was that Europe feared being left behind with the emergence of NAFTA and the proposed Asian trading blocks. The initial proposal was for a common currency and open borders with a European Parliament. This of course did not fly, so they adopted a hodgepodge of measures that they could get past the various countries. As a result they now have the worst of both worlds; they are neither fish nor fowl, they are a mess.
1
No, everyone does not lose if the Urk leaves- The UK will suffer in the long term.
2
The European tribes have been trying to kill each other off for millennia.
Yet during the past 70 years they have found a way to cooperate with each other, however limited and faulted. What they have today is better than the trench warfare, “Maginot Lines”, and “Blitzkrieg” of the past. (Then, too, the success of the EU is perhaps partly a result of the shift in power away from Europe to North America and now to Asia. Yet with that shift, the individual countries have far more power in the world as members of the EU than they would going it on their own.)
The European Union is still finding its way. It is in everyone’s best interest, including the British, to assist in the Union’s further evolution, whatever that might entail.
At the same time the EU also needs to address issues of dissatisfaction with it that exist widely amongst the citizens of member countries.
(The US had a hand in the creation of the EU. The US Marshall Plan after WWII required the Europeans to work together in dividing the Plan’s aid among themselves. The intent of the Plan was to help with European reconstruction, and to stop the advance of the Soviet Union, while also creating markets for US goods and services and fostering a return to peace. It was “enlightened self-interest” on our part, and some of the best use of taxpayer money in foreign policy, ever. It is still in the best interest of the US to foster European peace and unity through European cooperation.)
Yet during the past 70 years they have found a way to cooperate with each other, however limited and faulted. What they have today is better than the trench warfare, “Maginot Lines”, and “Blitzkrieg” of the past. (Then, too, the success of the EU is perhaps partly a result of the shift in power away from Europe to North America and now to Asia. Yet with that shift, the individual countries have far more power in the world as members of the EU than they would going it on their own.)
The European Union is still finding its way. It is in everyone’s best interest, including the British, to assist in the Union’s further evolution, whatever that might entail.
At the same time the EU also needs to address issues of dissatisfaction with it that exist widely amongst the citizens of member countries.
(The US had a hand in the creation of the EU. The US Marshall Plan after WWII required the Europeans to work together in dividing the Plan’s aid among themselves. The intent of the Plan was to help with European reconstruction, and to stop the advance of the Soviet Union, while also creating markets for US goods and services and fostering a return to peace. It was “enlightened self-interest” on our part, and some of the best use of taxpayer money in foreign policy, ever. It is still in the best interest of the US to foster European peace and unity through European cooperation.)
2
"Everyone Loses if Britain Exits the E.U.".
It's all relative, and Britain is bluffing: Britain would lose a lot more than would the E.U.: Sterling would crash, GDP would fall by well over 2 % and its crucially important financial sector would be surpassed by Frankfurt following a loss of around 100,000 high paying banking jobs. The London housing bubble would burst.
In fact, Brexit would constitute the worst of both worlds for Britain, as a far weaker currency would increase inflation without compensating its tiny manufacturing sector through a corresponding increase in exports.
So my message to U.K. Euro-skeptics is: "Beware what you pray for: Hell Is Answered Prayers."
It's all relative, and Britain is bluffing: Britain would lose a lot more than would the E.U.: Sterling would crash, GDP would fall by well over 2 % and its crucially important financial sector would be surpassed by Frankfurt following a loss of around 100,000 high paying banking jobs. The London housing bubble would burst.
In fact, Brexit would constitute the worst of both worlds for Britain, as a far weaker currency would increase inflation without compensating its tiny manufacturing sector through a corresponding increase in exports.
So my message to U.K. Euro-skeptics is: "Beware what you pray for: Hell Is Answered Prayers."
28
Ridiculous. It would be the best thing thst ever happened to them.
1
The British people are certainly not bluffing and will vote to leave by a 4% margin. Yes, the immediate cost of release will be a 2% drop in GDP and uncertainty for sterling but have you noticed that the majority of foreign-owned international and the vast majority of British companies say that it will make absolutely no difference to their operations? Like it or not, The U.K. is The U.S.'s most dependable ally and that will not change - Cheltenham GCHQ, MI5, MI6 are an integral part of 'Five Eyes' with US/Canada/ Australia/ N.Z.
The EU free trading area was an excellent concept that unrealistic continental politicians and Brussels bureaucrats are attempting to integrate into a political, cultural, and economic block at a leadership level against the wishes of their voters. It serves only German interests with an 8% trading surplus from exports subsidized by the cheap Euro weighed down by 10% unemployment in France, 11% in Italy, and 20% in Spain.
The U.K. has a population density of 650 per sq.mile and healthy demographics unlike Germany. You think it needs more unskilled immigrants? The EU has 28 members bullied by Germany, manipulated by France - you think The U.K. is not tired of dancing with this insatiable octopus of dictatorial intent. No Sir, its island people are chiefly Anglo-Saxons and the majority have now had more than enough of this long journey in the wrong direction along which their leaders have misled them .
The EU free trading area was an excellent concept that unrealistic continental politicians and Brussels bureaucrats are attempting to integrate into a political, cultural, and economic block at a leadership level against the wishes of their voters. It serves only German interests with an 8% trading surplus from exports subsidized by the cheap Euro weighed down by 10% unemployment in France, 11% in Italy, and 20% in Spain.
The U.K. has a population density of 650 per sq.mile and healthy demographics unlike Germany. You think it needs more unskilled immigrants? The EU has 28 members bullied by Germany, manipulated by France - you think The U.K. is not tired of dancing with this insatiable octopus of dictatorial intent. No Sir, its island people are chiefly Anglo-Saxons and the majority have now had more than enough of this long journey in the wrong direction along which their leaders have misled them .
1
"Sterling would crash"
Ah, a good opportunity to remind people that "Pound Sterling" once referred to the equivalence of one British Pound to one pound of sterling silver.
A later silver standard assigned a rate of £3 6s to one pound of silver, equivalent to four-and-one-eighth shillings per ounce).
Today it takes TEN British Pounds, or SIXTY shillings, to purchase one ounce of silver, meaning that British currency has depreciated more than 93% from the aforementioned silver standard.
Anyone who NOW claims to be concerned about the pound's depreciation at the hands of central bankers just hasn't been paying attention.
Ah, a good opportunity to remind people that "Pound Sterling" once referred to the equivalence of one British Pound to one pound of sterling silver.
A later silver standard assigned a rate of £3 6s to one pound of silver, equivalent to four-and-one-eighth shillings per ounce).
Today it takes TEN British Pounds, or SIXTY shillings, to purchase one ounce of silver, meaning that British currency has depreciated more than 93% from the aforementioned silver standard.
Anyone who NOW claims to be concerned about the pound's depreciation at the hands of central bankers just hasn't been paying attention.
Brexit would be a disaster for Britain. Just look at how terrible it turned out for us when we exited the British Empire.
38
I'll assume your saying this tongue in cheek. I'm thinking of India/Pakistan, South Africa.
So they get to keep the benefits of membership, but without the responsibilities?
Good riddance to bad rubbish.
Good riddance to bad rubbish.
23
As was reported in yesterday's Times:
(The) Italian prime minister, recently (said): “This is not Europe. This is a nightmare of looming fragmentation, violence and walls for the half-billion people now moving freely between Warsaw and Lisbon.”
Few among them are British.
(The) Italian prime minister, recently (said): “This is not Europe. This is a nightmare of looming fragmentation, violence and walls for the half-billion people now moving freely between Warsaw and Lisbon.”
Few among them are British.
3
We keep the reponsibilites. Would you, as an American citizen, expect Mexico to have a veto on your sovereignty, immigration, tax and benefits systems? No? Thought not. How this is an NY Pick is beyond belief! Subjective nonesense
The only nonsense is Tusk's proposal (and your erroneous comparison of the EU to North America)
As an EU citizen, living in the US, I don't see how it is fair for the UK to enjoy such privileges as free flow of capital through Europe (allowing for London's financial industry sector to rival New York's and having a substantial impact on the UK economy), without following the same rules that apply to other EU member states.
As an EU citizen, living in the US, I don't see how it is fair for the UK to enjoy such privileges as free flow of capital through Europe (allowing for London's financial industry sector to rival New York's and having a substantial impact on the UK economy), without following the same rules that apply to other EU member states.
1
Britain does not have much influence on European affairs and its views are subordinate to those of Germany , witness Iraq and Syria where there is no European unity of purpose.
For Economic and Governance purposes Britain will be far better off leaving Europe as it will save billions in not being a net contributor to European welfare.
In terms of governance it will be free of the petty bureaucracy of Brussels and Strasbourg and will bring agile and responsive government closer to the British people which will enhance the compeitiveness of the British economy .
Switzerland is a great model.
Europe is unlikely to impose levy,s on British imports as Europe enjoys a favorable balance of trade with Britain and Germany in particular will not want to see import duties on its exports to Britain.The financial markets in London are international and London will retain its position as the leading financial market
Yes the risk is Scotland will use Brexit as an excuse to leave the UK , no matter this will save the English taxpayers more billions which they can happily reinvest in health care and other programs .
For Economic and Governance purposes Britain will be far better off leaving Europe as it will save billions in not being a net contributor to European welfare.
In terms of governance it will be free of the petty bureaucracy of Brussels and Strasbourg and will bring agile and responsive government closer to the British people which will enhance the compeitiveness of the British economy .
Switzerland is a great model.
Europe is unlikely to impose levy,s on British imports as Europe enjoys a favorable balance of trade with Britain and Germany in particular will not want to see import duties on its exports to Britain.The financial markets in London are international and London will retain its position as the leading financial market
Yes the risk is Scotland will use Brexit as an excuse to leave the UK , no matter this will save the English taxpayers more billions which they can happily reinvest in health care and other programs .
52
Britain will be better off without EU.
We in the EU will try our best not to miss Britain too much.
To compensate losing Britain we certainly will welcome Scotland among us.
We in the EU will try our best not to miss Britain too much.
To compensate losing Britain we certainly will welcome Scotland among us.
That's part of the problem with the call for Brexit. It is the far-right amongst the English imposing their will on the rest of he UK. But even from England's limited perspective, exiting the EU makes no sense whatsoever. The very prosperity that the English think will insulate them from the wilderness is the result of EU membership. England has never been secure and has never felt secure by itself. Hence, through history, it has sought and had to create economic and political buffers, to first survive and then prosper. The United Kingdom and the Empire itself are manifestations of this inevitable aspect of English destiny, i.e. that England cannot survive alone. The very English independence and sovereignty that drives Brexit supporters will be most at risk if they exit the EU. the laughable irony is that, once outside the EU, the UK will seek to access the common market through treaty, which will require it to abide by virtually all existing and future EU legislation, a la Switzerland and Norway. Even the Norwegian government have advised Britain to stay put. My advice to people like you is to stop getting your news from the Sun and the Daily Mail and to read a proper newspaper instead. The New York Times is a good start.
2
The Scots are not daft. At the minute due to falling oil prices they are supported by the rest of the Uk
By "everyone" surely you mean "Anglo-American capital"? We need Britain in the EU so they can continue to operate as our trojan horse, forever thwarting the ambitions of the Brussels Eurocrats to conquer the continent. Beyond that very important reason I can see little reason why they ought to stay.
2
The ludicrous nonsensical statements made in this agit-prop were present in almost every sentence, but these two were particularly hilarious:
1) "...if it were to withdraw, and that would affect Britain’s ties to NATO and to the United States."
Really? How's that? How would either possibly be affected whether Britain is in the EU or not? That statement is is absurd.
2) "But if it pulls out of the union, it will have no more say on European migration policies and no right to help in policing the tunnel entrance in Calais, France..."
So Britain will just close its side of the tunnel and that would be the end of the story. Or it could just create a checkpoint on its side and examine every single vehicle for contraband and illegal aliens.
I nearly skipped this piece of propaganda when I saw it was from the dreadful editorial board, and after reading most of it - I wish I had. There is very little they write that is either realistic, rational, or interesting.
1) "...if it were to withdraw, and that would affect Britain’s ties to NATO and to the United States."
Really? How's that? How would either possibly be affected whether Britain is in the EU or not? That statement is is absurd.
2) "But if it pulls out of the union, it will have no more say on European migration policies and no right to help in policing the tunnel entrance in Calais, France..."
So Britain will just close its side of the tunnel and that would be the end of the story. Or it could just create a checkpoint on its side and examine every single vehicle for contraband and illegal aliens.
I nearly skipped this piece of propaganda when I saw it was from the dreadful editorial board, and after reading most of it - I wish I had. There is very little they write that is either realistic, rational, or interesting.
42
Considering it took the threat of British departure to get the EU to acknowledge a country has a right to "sovereignty" suggests maybe the whole project is worth serious reconstruction?
3
The Cameron-Trusk deal does make a good bit of sense. As a stand-alone economy, the U. K. would be a much smaller market, and it would lack diversity. Today, the world is moving more-and-more toward a global marketplace. After the Trans-Pacific Partnership, the Europe-Americas would be the next important step. I'm happy to see that the E. U. is loosening-up its constraints.
1
One China, two systems (when Hong Kong became part of China). Two currencies. Two sets of laws. Still a work in progress.
EU - 28 countries. Euro + 8 other currencies. Many legal systems. Good luck!
EU - 28 countries. Euro + 8 other currencies. Many legal systems. Good luck!
Not much of an argument for the EU, Times Editors!
Why have one big central bureaucracy making decisions at a distance instead of people who know the lay of the land?
The EU is the fantasy of those who hold on to dreams of Socialist Utopias but are naive about human nature.
It's past time to move towards a post-EU Europe.
Why have one big central bureaucracy making decisions at a distance instead of people who know the lay of the land?
The EU is the fantasy of those who hold on to dreams of Socialist Utopias but are naive about human nature.
It's past time to move towards a post-EU Europe.
5
Part of the crisis of Europe and its inability to handle major problems in the past was the lack of integration and common ground. Britain has been a main obstacle to thIs and in many ways acted more in lockstep with US policies. iI should either change its course or leave the union so problems can be a addressed with a more forceful shared approach by the other members.
1
Britain tried the "European Union" and what did get: unfetted immigration, more crime, destruction of its justice system, strange financial regulations and most of all the lost of national pride and status ....
4
Funny , but if Scotland ends the UK, it will apply for the EU and then it will just be England who will be out. ( Not sure where that places Wales )
2
Perhaps Britain will precipitate the dissolution of the European Union, an artificial assembly of states without any constitutional basis.
Looking at the history of Europe that could never be united by any one ruler, one can only wish, paraphrasing Cato the Elder's words about Carthage, "the EU accord is to be disssolved" -- pactum unionis europaeae rescindendum esse.
Looking at the history of Europe that could never be united by any one ruler, one can only wish, paraphrasing Cato the Elder's words about Carthage, "the EU accord is to be disssolved" -- pactum unionis europaeae rescindendum esse.
1
Yhe EU is a sclerotic, tyrannical, bureaucracy more interested in cosying up to global corporate lobbyists than anything else. Its current head is the former leader of the world's greatest tax haven for billionaires, Luxembourg.
This week, the EU caved in on weakened auto emission standards due to pressures from industry lobbyists. Its gross mishandling of the migrant crisis, which it knew was shaping up at least two years earlier, will contribute to the fall of Angela Merkel and the end of Schengen. The EU is considering a new VAT on children's clothes and food, also at the behest of corporate lobbyists. The Eurozone has been a failure economically, and Greece is imploding again - violent rioting on its streets now. In a desperate attempt to clean up the migrant mess it made, the EU is doing appalling deals with Turkey that EU taxpayers will have to fund. Its failure to protect its own borders despite plenty of warning that it should do so, has helped engender the far right across Europe.
All you have to do is look at who supports Britain remaining in the EU: Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan, the shadowy backers of TTIP . . . those whose greedy amorality brought the West's economies to their knees, and who are still behaving the same way with impunity.
The deal Cameron brought back displayed contempt for British voters and resulted in a YouGov poll with the LEAVE campaign 10 pts ahead.
If Goldman Sachs is for it, common sense dictates voting against it. Britain: save yourself!
This week, the EU caved in on weakened auto emission standards due to pressures from industry lobbyists. Its gross mishandling of the migrant crisis, which it knew was shaping up at least two years earlier, will contribute to the fall of Angela Merkel and the end of Schengen. The EU is considering a new VAT on children's clothes and food, also at the behest of corporate lobbyists. The Eurozone has been a failure economically, and Greece is imploding again - violent rioting on its streets now. In a desperate attempt to clean up the migrant mess it made, the EU is doing appalling deals with Turkey that EU taxpayers will have to fund. Its failure to protect its own borders despite plenty of warning that it should do so, has helped engender the far right across Europe.
All you have to do is look at who supports Britain remaining in the EU: Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan, the shadowy backers of TTIP . . . those whose greedy amorality brought the West's economies to their knees, and who are still behaving the same way with impunity.
The deal Cameron brought back displayed contempt for British voters and resulted in a YouGov poll with the LEAVE campaign 10 pts ahead.
If Goldman Sachs is for it, common sense dictates voting against it. Britain: save yourself!
6
Just as Britain marched to the precipice of disunion recently over the possibility of a Scottish departure, only to painfully inch back to safety from that prospect, there seems to be a general consensus that it will do the same with the much-feared “Brexit”, so long as there is some effort by Europe to address its most material concerns.
But, in the end, the “Brexit” is hardly the only sign of a natural tendency to Euro-disunion. Greece remains a basket case and may in the end conclude that reclaiming a national currency and sundering the shackles to German economic hegemony could be in their interest, as might Italy, Spain and Portugal. Eastern European members under pressure to accept more Syrian and other refugees may cause problems as far-right tendencies resist this pressure; and even France is exhibiting its own rebellious tendencies.
There is nothing intuitive or natural about a close union between states that do not share a national language, a history other than mutual war, cultural and political idiosyncrasies, in some cases fundamental values or a strong and universally supported central government. It’s even less natural to see a common currency imposed on such odd neighbors with such misaligned realities of productivity.
Europe might skate on a “Brexit” that never materializes; but for many other reasons, their union is a very iffy strategic matter.
But, in the end, the “Brexit” is hardly the only sign of a natural tendency to Euro-disunion. Greece remains a basket case and may in the end conclude that reclaiming a national currency and sundering the shackles to German economic hegemony could be in their interest, as might Italy, Spain and Portugal. Eastern European members under pressure to accept more Syrian and other refugees may cause problems as far-right tendencies resist this pressure; and even France is exhibiting its own rebellious tendencies.
There is nothing intuitive or natural about a close union between states that do not share a national language, a history other than mutual war, cultural and political idiosyncrasies, in some cases fundamental values or a strong and universally supported central government. It’s even less natural to see a common currency imposed on such odd neighbors with such misaligned realities of productivity.
Europe might skate on a “Brexit” that never materializes; but for many other reasons, their union is a very iffy strategic matter.
1
"Britain benefits enormously from membership in the union’s common market"
It isn't enough just to say that.
How does it benefit, and how much?
How does that benefit trade off with costs, and what is the net balance of the trade off?
Those questions matter. They illuminate the choice. I haven't seen anyone being specific like that. It is just a big yes/no shouting match.
It isn't enough just to say that.
How does it benefit, and how much?
How does that benefit trade off with costs, and what is the net balance of the trade off?
Those questions matter. They illuminate the choice. I haven't seen anyone being specific like that. It is just a big yes/no shouting match.
11
Britain leaving the EU would be akin to California seceding and becoming a neighbouring country like Mexico. You don't need to do the detailed math to realise that this might not end well for either Britain or the EU.
1
How can you confidently predict California wouldn't be better off as a sovereign state?
2
Many of the same people who would like Brittain to leave the EU, were absolutely convinced that Scotland leaving Great Brittain would spell doom. All I see is a mass of ill-considered risks and fairy tales about somehow keeping the benefits and getting rid of the drawbacks of EU membership.
3
If Britain punches above its weight in global politics today or reaps disproportionate economic/ financial benefits from the common European and global market, it's largely due to its European identity, though without investing much by way of its own contribution to such a common identity. If it exits the EU, despite already enjoying the Donald Rusk like proposals of special concessions or the proposed "opt-out" treaty clauses, it would neither be the Great, nor a united Britain; for it should be then prepared for the next jolt by the possible Scottish decision on the same lines of separation from the United Kingdom, which would weaken the British identity politically and economically, specially when the independent Scotland makes a bid to join the EU and the UN as a rival to Britain. The "Brexit" is thus neither a sound idea nor a right policy decision in the changed global reality of today.
4
"The world needs a united Europe" - in name only apparently. Because keeping Britain in the EU will mean the EU remains disunited, a sprawling state with nations who don't share the same vision of what the EU is for. For one thing keeping Britain means the EU will have most nations in the euro but a few not - that's about as disunited as it comes. The best way to make the euro work is to have the EU coincident with the euro countries, so that the EU superstructure can be transformed into a federal state with a common budget and a transfer union. Brexit is a necessity for that process to work.
Brexit would lead to a more united Europe. And that's actually why the Brits will unfortunately probably stay - because the foreign-policy goal of Britain for over three hundred years has been to ensure that Europe stays disunited.
Brexit would lead to a more united Europe. And that's actually why the Brits will unfortunately probably stay - because the foreign-policy goal of Britain for over three hundred years has been to ensure that Europe stays disunited.
9
Having followed this issue for some time and being of the opinion that Britain has very little if anything to lose by leaving the EU, I was tentatively optimistic, after reading your title, that you might provide some concrete reasons that would clearly illustrate WHAT, precisely, Britain would lose by leaving. Low and behold you provided NONE. Always on the periphery of the EU, adding this list of concessions to continued British membership would not only not benefit Britain but would also damage the EU itself. The basic principal upon which the EU stands is INTEGRATION. These concessions would WEAKEN that concept and provide an EXEMPTION for one country at the expense of others - how can that possibly be a good think for anyone? Clearly the British aren't "feeling European". What sort of example would allowing these exemptions set for Romanians or Poles or Greeks or any other nationality that is working hard to meet EU goals? I just don't see the point of Britain staying in the bloc in what would be, practically, name only if these exemptions are approved. Doesn't make sense, folks. Britain is a unique nation and can well survive outside the constricting confines of the EU which has become a Franco-German duopoly.
88
I read about the EU and how terrible it would be if some member broke away or became a failed State or something else happened to injure the EU. However, it has never been made clear to me what the EU did for its member States other that do away with the aggravation of travel across boarders and employ an enormously bloated and ineffective central administration with no real power. Its few claimed success in trade are unimpressive, and it remains in political gridlock as much as our own Congress. For centuries the British strength has been disciplined governance. They would be fine on their own.
82
We Europeans shall be happy to wish good luck to the Britons on their independent journey ; Britain has undermined the European construction from day 1. Unfortunately, there is no symmetrical referendum to come asking European people what they think of the Brexit. the result would be straightforward. This being said, it is understandable that the US wish their lackey to remain in place
25
I didn't know Canada was in Europe. Meanwhile, the UK pours billions into EU coffers, speaking of "undermining", and is a major EU trading partner - what the EU really fears is that a Brexit would soon be followed by a Grexit, Hexit, Dexit, and Frexit. The EU is busy selling itself to the global corporatists behind TTIP, and to Turkey, all the Eurosceptic parties in the EU are rising in the polls, the Eurozone economy has been a huge disappointment, and German security forces just foiled another terrorist plot led by a man . . . in a refugee shelter. European "unity" at this point is nonexistent - and that's not down to the UK, but to Merkel, Brussels, and Juncker.
7
European UNION? What union? I see no unity.
What a farce!
What a farce!
38
2 years ago when Pope said Europe is like a grandma, people mocked him for saying like that.Now look what what happened. Europe is too weak and is incompetent.
5
If the EU cannot manage its own problems, primarily the refugee issue, it will not be much more than a trading bloc. The UK public should rightly be skeptical of the promises of the EU. Germany, which was the dominant force, has managed to destroy the Schengen free-travel zone, managed to create a worse refugee/illegal migrant crisis than before, bullied its decisions on other nations that don't agree with its actions, and will be out of commission as a leader for a while "solving" its own problems, and not on the backs of other EU members. France, is under martial law, and has its own issues with terrorism and economy. Brussels is unable to make a decision. And the rest of Europe is NOT in agreement with the leaders on illegal migrants or austerity.
The ONLY way the UK public should even entertain staying in the EU is if they have wide latitude to reject the worst of the stupid EU rules and agreements like taking in illegal migrants/refugees because Germany and Sweden are overwhelmed and having second thoughts.
It's not a sure thing. And if I was a UK citizen I'd want the details before I voted. And my inclination would be to exit the EU.
The ONLY way the UK public should even entertain staying in the EU is if they have wide latitude to reject the worst of the stupid EU rules and agreements like taking in illegal migrants/refugees because Germany and Sweden are overwhelmed and having second thoughts.
It's not a sure thing. And if I was a UK citizen I'd want the details before I voted. And my inclination would be to exit the EU.
111
Minh z........France is not under martial law....France has the highest numbers of Arab citizens in Europe. .....most communities, like mine, get along well with their arab neighbors with no friction.....
The European Union was a mistake....it lacks support from a large number of Europeans and should have been left with trade agreements as before 2000. Hopefully, Britain will exit and begin an unraveling of the EU.
The European Union was a mistake....it lacks support from a large number of Europeans and should have been left with trade agreements as before 2000. Hopefully, Britain will exit and begin an unraveling of the EU.
4
It seems certain that if the UK were to elect to leave the EU, then most certainly Scotland would re-assert itself to elect to leave the UK in order to draw more closely with the EU.
That makes the question of leaving the UK much more complicated. Cameron might yet oversea the demolition of the political unit he has been charged with managing.
Without Scotland, the remainder of the UK would be about the size of the state of Michigan with a population of 50 million squeezed into it. It will then be a much different entity in regard to its role in the world and the ability to influence events: not that there is anything wrong with that.
It seems to me, as I commented elsewhere, that Europe needs to reorganize its integration into a cascading level of integration allowing nations to position themselves in a manner that is appropriate to their own set of circumstances and identity. The United Kingdom's national formation is older than most and as a result, perhaps stronger and more distinct and certainly not something to be let go of hastily.
That makes the question of leaving the UK much more complicated. Cameron might yet oversea the demolition of the political unit he has been charged with managing.
Without Scotland, the remainder of the UK would be about the size of the state of Michigan with a population of 50 million squeezed into it. It will then be a much different entity in regard to its role in the world and the ability to influence events: not that there is anything wrong with that.
It seems to me, as I commented elsewhere, that Europe needs to reorganize its integration into a cascading level of integration allowing nations to position themselves in a manner that is appropriate to their own set of circumstances and identity. The United Kingdom's national formation is older than most and as a result, perhaps stronger and more distinct and certainly not something to be let go of hastily.
Nine of the poorest regions in Northern Europe are in the UK:
West Wales, UK
Cornwall, UK
Durham and Tees Valley, UK
Lincolnshire, UK
South Yorkshire, UK
Shropshire and Strafforshire, UK
Lancashire, UK
Northern Ireland, UK
Hainut, Belgium
East Yorkshire and North Lincolnshire, UK
The richest region in Europe is inner London. If Britain exits the E.U., the financial center will move from London to Frankfurt. England will become Greece.
West Wales, UK
Cornwall, UK
Durham and Tees Valley, UK
Lincolnshire, UK
South Yorkshire, UK
Shropshire and Strafforshire, UK
Lancashire, UK
Northern Ireland, UK
Hainut, Belgium
East Yorkshire and North Lincolnshire, UK
The richest region in Europe is inner London. If Britain exits the E.U., the financial center will move from London to Frankfurt. England will become Greece.
2
I would rather see a Brexit like a liberation for the EU. Britain has only been a dead weight ever since it joined the EU decades ago. I can't think of anything that it has contributed to the construction of the Union - I feel that it hindered it instead year after year. And in the meantime the City has become even more of a powerful financial place, so in a way Britain already has "the best of both worlds".
The Brits were never really in, now they must get out. Yes, they were there at Ypres during WW1 and on the beaches of Normandy during WW2 and they deserve our immense gratefulness and respect, but now Europe needs to regroup around countries that actually want to move forward towards realizing the dream of the European founders. I believe that that dream is not dead yet.
The Brits were never really in, now they must get out. Yes, they were there at Ypres during WW1 and on the beaches of Normandy during WW2 and they deserve our immense gratefulness and respect, but now Europe needs to regroup around countries that actually want to move forward towards realizing the dream of the European founders. I believe that that dream is not dead yet.
23
Yes, the dead weight of billions of UK pounds paid into the EU coffers would be barely missed, eh? The EU needs the UK more than the UK needs the EU, and a successful Brexit vote would spread like an internet virus through the other countries angry about what the EU has foisted off on them.
You may find a few other "dead weights" falling away after a Brexit: murmurs are rising in France, Holland, Denmark, and the AfD in Germany just went over 10% in the polls. At the rate the EU is going, that referendum may be a moot point after the next three million migrants try to bash their way in, the EU throws Greece to the wolves, and surreptitiously sells its soul, and its member states, variously, to TTIP and Turkey.
You may find a few other "dead weights" falling away after a Brexit: murmurs are rising in France, Holland, Denmark, and the AfD in Germany just went over 10% in the polls. At the rate the EU is going, that referendum may be a moot point after the next three million migrants try to bash their way in, the EU throws Greece to the wolves, and surreptitiously sells its soul, and its member states, variously, to TTIP and Turkey.
13
The Brits have sabotaged Europe since the war in Irak, which was a Blair/Bush war and incidentally is also one of the main causes of the current refugee crisis. Moreover the City was prominently responsible for the financial crisis, the fallout of which triggered the crisis of the southern Eurpean countries. Britain has been cherrypicking for way too long while obstructing a more sensible European answers towards those catastrophic US centric policies of warfare and criminal finance. Europe would therefor be better off with Britain out of the Union.
2
"Britain has only been a dead weight ever since it joined the EU decades ago. I can't think of anything that it has contributed to the construction of the Union"
Money. And legitimacy.
Money. And legitimacy.
4
I'm not sure it's the responsibility of Britain to maintain the viability of the EU. While as a current member it certainly has some import, it has an equal (or greater) responsibility to the welfare of ts own British citizens.
61
About time for the EU farce to end. It's been great for economically motivated immigrants and has only led to uncertainty, misery, inflation and unemployment for Europeans.
75
Actually, you underestimate the benefits of free travel (if they would and could secure their external borders) and unified currency. But those two policies could be implemented without a United States of Europe, led around kicking and screaming by the needs and desires of German banks.
you think! We need the United Kingdom to be aligned with the rest of Europe in the worst possible way. So much instability due to ME immigration requires a very large support base. I truly hope British logic overrides the short term emotion.
9