Brexit

Moggy wrote:

captain red dog wrote:I get what you are saying about distributing funds Moggy, but we have blatant inequality like Greece which is utterly crippled and seemingly no end to the problems they are facing. Then there is the issue of EU expansion, adding nations into the pot without the approval of the 'tax payers'.

Greece’s problem came from their own ineptitude. The EU was not to blame for the massive spending and lack of tax paying. The EU might have been able to do more to help, but they are not to blame for the entire collapse of the Greek economy. And despite the constant Leave arguments about Greece, Greece itself wants to stay in the EU.

Any nation that joins the EU has to be approved by the existing members and every single nation has a veto on new members. The “taxpayers” are not directly approving them, but then why would they? Their elected governments make the decision on whether to allow or veto a new member state, why would there be a referendum in every single member state whenever a new member state wanted to join?

The Euro certainly made the problems of the PIIGS worse than they otherwise would have been had they the normal economic tools available to other countries such as control of their own interest rates, an exchange rate based on their own national economy, the ability to print money and the ability to default with vastly reduced risk of contagion.

It's quite an interesting alternative history to consider if the UK had joined the Euro 20 years ago. Our boom and bust and recovery would be very different and given the size of the banking problems we had here, it's easy enough to imagine the UK causing the collapse of the Euro currency since it would be too much big to bail.

Grumpy David wrote:

Moggy wrote:

captain red dog wrote:I get what you are saying about distributing funds Moggy, but we have blatant inequality like Greece which is utterly crippled and seemingly no end to the problems they are facing. Then there is the issue of EU expansion, adding nations into the pot without the approval of the 'tax payers'.

Greece’s problem came from their own ineptitude. The EU was not to blame for the massive spending and lack of tax paying. The EU might have been able to do more to help, but they are not to blame for the entire collapse of the Greek economy. And despite the constant Leave arguments about Greece, Greece itself wants to stay in the EU.

Any nation that joins the EU has to be approved by the existing members and every single nation has a veto on new members. The “taxpayers” are not directly approving them, but then why would they? Their elected governments make the decision on whether to allow or veto a new member state, why would there be a referendum in every single member state whenever a new member state wanted to join?

The Euro certainly made the problems of the PIIGS worse than they otherwise would have been had they the normal economic tools available to other countries such as control of their own interest rates, an exchange rate based on their own national economy, the ability to print money and the ability to default with vastly reduced risk of contagion.

It's quite an interesting alternative history to consider if the UK had joined the Euro 20 years ago. Our boom and bust and recovery would be very different and given the size of the banking problems we had here, it's easy enough to imagine the UK causing the collapse of the Euro currency since it would be too much big to bail.

The Euro may well have made it harder, but it didn’t cause the issues and it wasn’t what continued the issues. Plus none of those countries had to join the Euro, that is a completely separate issue to what we were talking about and is not relevant to Brexit or how much funding Poland receives.

Meep wrote:We benefit from the EU investment in other countries though. Think of how much business the UK does with Ireland (one of the largest markets for the UK), now think of how much the Irish economy and consumer demand has improved and increased since it has benefited from EU investment. Aside from the demand for UK goods and services, there is also the extra strength this lends to the EU as a whole internationally. It does not take a genius to realise that when one poorer EU country improves all the other EU countries benefit as well. EU development funds are an intelligent use of money and allow a relatively small contribution each individual member state to have a very significant impact compared with what each individual state alone could achieve within its own borders, in the same way we gain from pooling our influence and negotiating power.

We did benefit from EU investment but being one of the worlds leading technological and pharmaceutical hubs has had nothing to do with Europe at all. Our tax and educational system achieved this status. You make us out to be Bolivia or something!

Brexit looks like even more jobs coming over here.

https://www.rte.ie/news/business/2017/0629/886445-project/

The vast majority of project managers here expect an increase in the number of projects coming to Ireland as a direct result of Brexit, according to a survey of members of the Project Management Institute. 80% of respondents saw a pick up in international work in the near future, largely thanks to Britain's vote to leave the European Union.

Photek wrote:Brexit looks like even more jobs coming over here.

https://www.rte.ie/news/business/2017/0629/886445-project/

The vast majority of project managers here expect an increase in the number of projects coming to Ireland as a direct result of Brexit, according to a survey of members of the Project Management Institute. 80% of respondents saw a pick up in international work in the near future, largely thanks to Britain's vote to leave the European Union.

It would make sense. With the UK out of the EU, Ireland will massively benefit from being an English speaking country that also has access to the free market.

Photek wrote:
We did benefit from EU investment but being one of the worlds leading technological and pharmaceutical hubs has had nothing to do with Europe at all. Our tax and educational system achieved this status. You make us out to be Bolivia or something!

Those companies wouldn't have come to Ireland if we weren't in the EU. Apple chose to build Athenry instead of a site in Scotland for a major data centre because they needed a location that was guaranteed to be staying in the EU. The fact it still hasn't been built because some divs are holding up the development with flimsy planning objections is another story....

bear wrote:

Photek wrote:
We did benefit from EU investment but being one of the worlds leading technological and pharmaceutical hubs has had nothing to do with Europe at all. Our tax and educational system achieved this status. You make us out to be Bolivia or something!

Those companies wouldn't have come to Ireland if we weren't in the EU. Apple chose to build Athenry instead of a site in Scotland for a major data centre because they needed a location that was guaranteed to be staying in the EU. The fact it still hasn't been built because some divs are holding up the development with flimsy planning objections is another story....

Of course being part of the single market is huge but they didn't come because of EU investment, in fact, EU are quite annoyed at the almost monopoly we have in the Tech and Pharma sectors.

The plannings situation here is archaic and needs to be changes asap. Dublin Airport has to apply to Fingal county Council for a new Runway/Terminal. Ridiculous.

Photek wrote:

Meep wrote:We benefit from the EU investment in other countries though. Think of how much business the UK does with Ireland (one of the largest markets for the UK), now think of how much the Irish economy and consumer demand has improved and increased since it has benefited from EU investment. Aside from the demand for UK goods and services, there is also the extra strength this lends to the EU as a whole internationally. It does not take a genius to realise that when one poorer EU country improves all the other EU countries benefit as well. EU development funds are an intelligent use of money and allow a relatively small contribution each individual member state to have a very significant impact compared with what each individual state alone could achieve within its own borders, in the same way we gain from pooling our influence and negotiating power.

We did benefit from EU investment but being one of the worlds leading technological and pharmaceutical hubs has had nothing to do with Europe at all. Our tax and educational system achieved this status. You make us out to be Bolivia or something

No, that would be harsh on Bolivia

Grumpy David wrote:
The Euro certainly made the problems of the PIIGS worse than they otherwise would have been had they the normal economic tools available to other countries such as control of their own interest rates, an exchange rate based on their own national economy, the ability to print money and the ability to default with vastly reduced risk of contagion.

I've heard theories like this bandied about a few times during discussions about Ireland's economic crash but I'm not sure how well they hold up. Being in the Euro certainly benefitted me as the value of my savings and wages held up during the crisis even if a greater percentage of my money went on taxes. We've seen with Breixt that the markets simply won't wait for a government to adjust the value of a currency, the markets will do that for them very quickly. Sterling dropped by $0.20 near instantly after the referendum and I'm sure the Irish punt would have taken an absolute battering once the scale of the problems Brian Cowen had caused with his economic policy that was built solely around winning an election. How much flexibility does a government then have if they've got a decimated tax base, massively devalued currency and a huge deficit?

bear wrote:

Grumpy David wrote:
The Euro certainly made the problems of the PIIGS worse than they otherwise would have been had they the normal economic tools available to other countries such as control of their own interest rates, an exchange rate based on their own national economy, the ability to print money and the ability to default with vastly reduced risk of contagion.

I've heard theories like this bandied about a few times during discussions about Ireland's economic crash but I'm not sure how well they hold up. Being in the Euro certainly benefitted me as the value of my savings and wages held up during the crisis even if a greater percentage of my money went on taxes. We've seen with Breixt that the markets simply won't wait for a government to adjust the value of a currency, the markets will do that for them very quickly. Sterling dropped by $0.20 near instantly after the referendum and I'm sure the Irish punt would have taken an absolute battering once the scale of the problems Brian Cowen had caused with his economic policy that was built solely around winning an election. How much flexibility does a government then have if they've got a decimated tax base, massively devalued currency and a huge deficit?

The point of a national currency is that it reflects the market wisdom on the value of it, it's only worth what others are willing to pay for it. When you have widely different economies in different parts of an economic cycle such as the Eurozone, you have to have a one size fits all interest rate and a currency valued on the overall block value which means that the Euro undervalues the German economy and overvalues the Southern European economies. This affects the Eurozone economies in good times and bad times.

Iceland is an economy which had all 3 factors: reduced tax base, reduced currency value and a huge deficit and they've been very successful in returning to growth.

Ireland is the only good example of a PIIG economy recovering well. 10% cut in government spending makes UK austerity look tame & they've had faster growth. Whilst wages weren't affected in your case, for many in Ireland and the other PIIGS, it was actually the mass unemployment that was the issue.

Ireland had the massive benefit of having a relatively small national debt before things went tits up. It's something that doesn't get enough coverage in Irish media but I think we went from spending something like €2billion in servicing debt before the crisis to around €6billion last year. Now that things have stabilised I think the government has a duty to tackle that debt. There's no point implementing an austerity policy for years if they don't try and reduce that annual cost of national debt from this point on.



My point about my wages was that being in the Euro meant that my wages continued to be worth something. If I had been faced with a reduced wage due to taxation in addition to spiraling costs on transports, power and food due to a devalued currency I'd have to leave Ireland. The same is true for a lot of people I went to college and worked with.

Lucien wrote:I get that. My point was I think it's ok for people to pay tax to their own government, but I wouldn't ask them to pay tax towards another government's spending.

You are viewing it as the UK funding Poland, whereas we were just paying our membership fee and the EU were then distributing the funds accordingly. The UK benefits/benefitted massively from the arrangement, just look at the black hole that will there in the finances of place like Wales and Cornwall once we leave.

It’s an odd idea that we should leave because Poland received money. The benefits of the single market alone far outweigh any of “our” money that goes to other EU nations.

The UK never subsidised other countries in the EU. The idea is that richer EU nations are essentially investing in the poorer/less developed countries for the long term. The idea being that eventually those countries begin to contribute more in than they take out which means more money for EU wide projects that benefit everybody.

If you think of it as 'subsidising' then you've been stupid enough to fall for propaganda and seem to be implying that those countries are never going to improve.


Oh, and on a slightly different subject,

twitter.com/PolhomeEditor/status/880396811571253248

As Laga says it is investment, as they grow they become bigger consumers increasing imports etc. and we benefit. We also get the to take advantage of people wanting to move here giving us workers to fuel the economy. Suggesting they are freeloaders and are subsidised is very shortsighted and very showing of the selfishness that is taking over peoples views of late.

Lucien wrote:

Errkal wrote:As Laga says it is investment, as they grow they become bigger consumers increasing imports etc. and we benefit. We also get the to take advantage of people wanting to move here giving us workers to fuel the economy. Suggesting they are freeloaders and are subsidised is very shortsighted and very showing of the selfishness that is taking over peoples views of late.

It's not selfishness I promise you; I'd vote Leave no matter what EU country I lived in. But granted for a lot of others it will be selfishness.

You dont want to have money going to a country that needs help, instead you want to stay with your country, that is selfish.

Errkal wrote:

Lucien wrote:

Errkal wrote:As Laga says it is investment, as they grow they become bigger consumers increasing imports etc. and we benefit. We also get the to take advantage of people wanting to move here giving us workers to fuel the economy. Suggesting they are freeloaders and are subsidised is very shortsighted and very showing of the selfishness that is taking over peoples views of late.

It's not selfishness I promise you; I'd vote Leave no matter what EU country I lived in. But granted for a lot of others it will be selfishness.

You dont want to have money going to a country that needs help, instead you want to stay with your country, that is selfish.

I think he is saying he voted to Leave for other reasons, not because Poland receive money.

Errkal wrote:

Lucien wrote:

Errkal wrote:As Laga says it is investment, as they grow they become bigger consumers increasing imports etc. and we benefit. We also get the to take advantage of people wanting to move here giving us workers to fuel the economy. Suggesting they are freeloaders and are subsidised is very shortsighted and very showing of the selfishness that is taking over peoples views of late.

It's not selfishness I promise you; I'd vote Leave no matter what EU country I lived in. But granted for a lot of others it will be selfishness.

You dont want to have money going to a country that needs help, instead you want to stay with your country, that is selfish.

It is selfishness end of. You live in one of the worlds richest nations.

And yet we have rising food bank use. Go figure.

Lucien wrote:

Errkal wrote:

Lucien wrote:

Errkal wrote:As Laga says it is investment, as they grow they become bigger consumers increasing imports etc. and we benefit. We also get the to take advantage of people wanting to move here giving us workers to fuel the economy. Suggesting they are freeloaders and are subsidised is very shortsighted and very showing of the selfishness that is taking over peoples views of late.

It's not selfishness I promise you; I'd vote Leave no matter what EU country I lived in. But granted for a lot of others it will be selfishness.

You dont want to have money going to a country that needs help, instead you want to stay with your country, that is selfish.

You couldn't have read what you quoted. If I lived in a poorer EU country I would still vote Leave.

But you don't live in a poorer nation...so that statement basically means nought. In the context you actually live in, it is incredibly selfish.

Rex Kramer wrote:And yet we have rising food bank use. Go figure.

Tory government.

Lucien wrote:

DML wrote:But you don't live in a poorer nation...so that statement basically means nought. In the context you actually live in, it is incredibly selfish.

That makes no sense. That's like saying I'm selfish if I get a Tory tax cut even though I voted for Labour. The benefit you see me as getting had no influence on my decision.

But you are getting the benefit. By making your decision you deny the money elsewhere.

Its selfish.