Crime Cases Still Using Cassettes
Technology8 mins ago
To be in, or not to be in?
46 Answers
http://www.express.co...you-should-join-euro-
Given the choice of staying in the EU, and consequently having to join the Euro area, or coming out of the EU altogether, what should we do?
Given the choice of staying in the EU, and consequently having to join the Euro area, or coming out of the EU altogether, what should we do?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by anotheoldgit. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Out altogether.
the 'fear' is that we will lose our trading position.
Since trade began, it has existed on a basis of supply and demand - if Euro countries want our goods and services, they will negotiate to get them.
Our absence from the Euro currency has not prevented us from trading with our neighbours.
The disadvantages of the cosy Euro cartel are exposed daily - we need to distance ourslves from it.
the 'fear' is that we will lose our trading position.
Since trade began, it has existed on a basis of supply and demand - if Euro countries want our goods and services, they will negotiate to get them.
Our absence from the Euro currency has not prevented us from trading with our neighbours.
The disadvantages of the cosy Euro cartel are exposed daily - we need to distance ourslves from it.
fortunately the farsighted Gordon Brown kept the UK out of the euro. I expect some day some Tories will recognise this legacy to the country... but not for a generation or two maybe?
Britain is already in the EU and not in the euro, so that shouldn't require any further choice.
Sooner or later England will vote to leave the EU and Scotland will vote to stay in. Salmond at least is ready for this, but the thought terrifies Cameron.
Britain is already in the EU and not in the euro, so that shouldn't require any further choice.
Sooner or later England will vote to leave the EU and Scotland will vote to stay in. Salmond at least is ready for this, but the thought terrifies Cameron.
“Why on earth would we be forced to join the Euro to stay in the EU?”
Because Mr. Barraso says so, jake, that’s why. And as we all know, in matters European, what the unelected leaders say suddenly becomes fact.
I’m pleased to learn that I am not alone on AB, andy, in believing that the further we distance ourselves from this madness the better off we will all be.
The scaremongering that abounds when talk of our withdrawal is mentioned is preposterous. We hear such things as “Three million jobs depend on the EU”. No they don’t. Three million jobs may well depend on the export of goods and services to other EU countries. But those exports will not suddenly cease should we leave the Union. On the contrary, our businesses are likely to become far more competitive when we are unshackled from EU regulation. When they do they are likely to become more attractive to European (and indeed other) customers. As you quite rightly say, businesses trade where it most suits them.
Some will say that the multi-nationals (particularly US organisations) do not “think UK” when investing, but they “think Europe”. Once again, if the UK is more competitive than the rest of Europe the Americans will soon get a map out and find out where the UK is.
The suggestion by Mr Barraso that the future for all EU countries lies with the Euro indicates to me that he has not read the papers for a couple of weeks. It is most unlikely that the Eurozone will number as many as seventeen members by this time next year. If it does, what sort of financial state they will be in (including the more prosperous ones) will be interesting to behold. Never mind. Nothing must jeopardise the European project or its hapless currency and Mr Barraso’s ramblings demonstrate how out of touch the Eurocrats are with planet Earth.
There are plenty of nations clamouring to join the EU. Any one of them is more than welcome to our seat at the table.
Because Mr. Barraso says so, jake, that’s why. And as we all know, in matters European, what the unelected leaders say suddenly becomes fact.
I’m pleased to learn that I am not alone on AB, andy, in believing that the further we distance ourselves from this madness the better off we will all be.
The scaremongering that abounds when talk of our withdrawal is mentioned is preposterous. We hear such things as “Three million jobs depend on the EU”. No they don’t. Three million jobs may well depend on the export of goods and services to other EU countries. But those exports will not suddenly cease should we leave the Union. On the contrary, our businesses are likely to become far more competitive when we are unshackled from EU regulation. When they do they are likely to become more attractive to European (and indeed other) customers. As you quite rightly say, businesses trade where it most suits them.
Some will say that the multi-nationals (particularly US organisations) do not “think UK” when investing, but they “think Europe”. Once again, if the UK is more competitive than the rest of Europe the Americans will soon get a map out and find out where the UK is.
The suggestion by Mr Barraso that the future for all EU countries lies with the Euro indicates to me that he has not read the papers for a couple of weeks. It is most unlikely that the Eurozone will number as many as seventeen members by this time next year. If it does, what sort of financial state they will be in (including the more prosperous ones) will be interesting to behold. Never mind. Nothing must jeopardise the European project or its hapless currency and Mr Barraso’s ramblings demonstrate how out of touch the Eurocrats are with planet Earth.
There are plenty of nations clamouring to join the EU. Any one of them is more than welcome to our seat at the table.
Entirely agree NJ - to my way of thinking, if you want to buy something, and the price is right, the location of the seller, or its membership of a particular old boys' network is not the issue - it simply comes down to product and price.
You can extrapolate that argument to include nations and continents, its validity does not diminish with larger areas, or costs.
You can extrapolate that argument to include nations and continents, its validity does not diminish with larger areas, or costs.
the free lunches are in effect paid for by the higher prices charged to non-members. In the specific case of Costco: others charge more for more convenient premises, opening hours etc; Costco charges less because of economies of scale, plus membership charges.
It's up to people whether they join, and up to Costco whether they're accepted. But my point is that the "exclusive club" commercial model can work, and many people are happy with it.
It's up to people whether they join, and up to Costco whether they're accepted. But my point is that the "exclusive club" commercial model can work, and many people are happy with it.
I think I'm right in saying we are running a trade deficit of about £40 billion with the Eu, and that we're the third largest net contributor.
If someone asked me to join a club on those terms, I'd run a mile.
Even apart from the fact that the auditors have refused to sign the accounts for 16 years, and that the entire commission have had to resign - twice - for fiddling.
Please feel free to correct any of the above, but please give sources rather than opinions...
If someone asked me to join a club on those terms, I'd run a mile.
Even apart from the fact that the auditors have refused to sign the accounts for 16 years, and that the entire commission have had to resign - twice - for fiddling.
Please feel free to correct any of the above, but please give sources rather than opinions...
"Once again, if the UK is more competitive than the rest of Europe the Americans will soon get a map out and find out where the UK is. "
Usual naivety from NJ. The US don't care how competitive the UK is, they care about the size of the potential market. The UK is a tiny market compared to the EU. US firms invest in the UK to give them access to the European market, and if the UK is not part of that, then it makes more sense for them to invest in countries that are.
Usual naivety from NJ. The US don't care how competitive the UK is, they care about the size of the potential market. The UK is a tiny market compared to the EU. US firms invest in the UK to give them access to the European market, and if the UK is not part of that, then it makes more sense for them to invest in countries that are.
Because, jake, like Mr Clegg (former MEP and expectant of a nice pension from them) and Mr Cameron and a few other senior politicians, when they get chucked out of domestic politics (as they all eventually do, regardless of party or success rate) there is a nice second career beckoning for them in Brussels (and once a month in Strasbourg). Mr Milliband will be no different, even if he fails to get the top job here (c. Neil Kinnock). Mr Clegg, I believe, has already got his interview date for his next EU position.
The benefits for the UK come a very poor second to this consideration, as do the wishes of the electorate.
So, rojash, the US companies only set up shop here to gain access to EU markets? So why don't they set up in the countries where their markets are, and cut out the middle man?
The benefits for the UK come a very poor second to this consideration, as do the wishes of the electorate.
So, rojash, the US companies only set up shop here to gain access to EU markets? So why don't they set up in the countries where their markets are, and cut out the middle man?
Latest Posts
ChatterBank43 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles89 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles90 mins ago
News152 mins ago
