Victory Brexit: consequences for Europe?

Current Economy and Sustainable Development-compatible? GDP growth (at all costs), economic development, inflation ... How concillier the current economy with the environment and sustainable development.
User avatar
Did67
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 20362
Registration: 20/01/08, 16:34
Location: Alsace
x 8685

Re: Victory Brexit: consequences for Europe?




by Did67 » 02/07/16, 11:09

Philippe Schutt wrote:
that, it seems to me that it is for the European Economic Area. A country can be part of it without being part of the EU, for example Norway.


You are right to correct me.

That said, membership of the EEA presupposes acceptance of a lot of things (standards, regulations, etc. established in Brussels, without participating in the decisions), which it seems to me were rejected by the referendum. .

If the British leave the EU and join the EEA, it's a bit of a contortion! But given the consistency of what is happening at the moment, why not?

https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Espace_%C ... op%C3%A9en


"In return, these countries must adopt part of the laws of the European Union. These states, however, have little influence on the decision-making process in Brussels.

The EFTA countries belonging to the EEA do not obey the financial constraints associated with membership of the European Union, although they contribute financially to the European common market. "

... / ...




"The EEA non-EU member states (Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway) have agreed to adopt legislation similar to that passed in the Union in the areas of social policy, consumer protection, environment, business law and statistics are some of the areas covered by the European Community, the first pillar of the European Union.

These same States are not represented within the institutions of the European Union such as the European Commission or the European Parliament. In February 2001, Norwegian Prime Minister Jens Stoltenberg described the situation as a 'faxed democracy', with Norway waiting for its latest legislation to be faxed from the Commission2. "


I admit that I don't know if this will be accepted ??? I thought not (but I thought people were consistent!).
0 x
Janic
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 19224
Registration: 29/10/10, 13:27
Location: bourgogne
x 3491

Re: Victory Brexit: consequences for Europe?




by Janic » 02/07/16, 12:36

(but I thought people were consistent!).
eh! Consistent .... ??? blah!
0 x
"We make science with facts, like making a house with stones: but an accumulation of facts is no more a science than a pile of stones is a house" Henri Poincaré
User avatar
Obamot
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 28725
Registration: 22/08/09, 22:38
Location: regio genevesis
x 5538

Re: Victory Brexit: consequences for Europe?




by Obamot » 02/07/16, 13:14

Did67 wrote:You are right to correct me.

That said, membership in EEA supposes the acceptance of a lot of things (standards, regulations, etc. established in Brussels, without participating in the decisions), which it seems to me that this was rejected by the referendum ...

If the British leave the EU and join the EEA, it's a bit of a contortion! But given the consistency of what is happening at the moment, why not?
"The non-EU EEA member states (Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway) have agreed to adopt legislation similar to that passed in the Union in the areas of social policy, consumer protection, environment, business law and statistics These are some of the areas covered by the European Community, the first pillar of the European Union. [/ i]


the UK is already part of EEA

In my humble opinion this sentence is missing:

Preparatory decisions amending the Agreement are taken by consensus between the European Union and EFTA in the EEA Council,

Because the members of the EEA are not the members of EFTA ...!

Organizations_Supranationles_Européennnes.jpg


Proof is that the countries mentioned by you, taking the list of Wiki, are part of the list of members of EFTA (which is just missing Switzerland.) >>> and not from the list of EEA countries (and if I'm not mistaken ...).
In Switzerland too there is a quest "of eurocompatibility"Which is called the"bi-lateral"[...] >>>
Did67 wrote:
"These same states are not represented in European Union institutions such as the European Commission or the European Parliament. In February 2001, Norwegian Prime Minister Jens Stoltenberg described the situation as a 'faxed democracy', with Norway was waiting for its latest legislation to be faxed from the Commission2. "[/ i]

It is not completely that since they can defend their crucial interests thanks to lobbyists! (But it's still a fragile situation.)
The UK is an expert in this area.
It is scandalous in terms of the confiscation of democracy, but as long as a complaint has not been filed there or a substantive wave has not complained, it will continue as before. For me this is what partly explains some brexit votes. Europe is in no way democratic, as long as it is private interests which make the determining laws.

And that's much BIGGER than brexit.
0 x
User avatar
Obamot
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 28725
Registration: 22/08/09, 22:38
Location: regio genevesis
x 5538

Re: Victory Brexit: consequences for Europe?




by Obamot » 02/07/16, 14:56

Basically, if you think about it and say that the Conservatives (led by David Cameron) are not idiots, you say that:

1) Cameron launches a referendum which is a bluff. If the United Kingdom does not leave it (brexit failure) it continues as before.

2) If the United Kingdom leaves it, it creates an inextricable - but wanted - legal situation in Europe (which does not want to part with a member even like the United Kingdom who has always been sitting on a folding seat ...) and that the exit ticket will necessarily be associated with eurocompatibility and compromise arrangements, so that the United Kingdom is outside the EU without having completely left it.
Typical British hypocrisy : Mrgreen:

3) If the Europeans fall into the trap, then the United Kingdom will have won across the board!

Because see the new establishment of dominant political England in this new scheme:

UK butter and butter money.jpg


We see that it is a unique position, the great castling in the chess game between the "king" (the EU) ... and ... the .... queen!

Some observations in passing on the NEW position of political England:

    a) it is still not in the € uro zone which could fluctuate without affecting the pound sterling (which admittedly momentarily fell).

    b) it is still part of the European Customs Union, so that does nothing to harm its exports!

    c) it is still part of the EEA (which is the complementary point to the previous point). Which is another of his main concerns. Since only the economic aspect seems to interest him.

    d) no longer being part of the EU, it is no longer subject to any constraints voted by the Union, such as the regulation of financial markets. The bankster sector can continue to speculate thoroughly in all areas without being subject to possible penalties.

    e) if the EU sinks economically or politically, England will be grown (it has to be seen in the long term).

    f) it leaves to Germany alone, the burden of balancing the accounts of Europe (so it believes it can thus weaken Germany?)

    g) it will be able to play on the differences in directives between the EU and the EEA and thus secure an exclusive place in certain areas.

    h) what makes that for simple questions of taxation and their trust regime authorized there, on the contrary it is likely to become very attractive by playing on the 2 tables. Because there will be de facto scenarios of complementary possibilities between Northern Ireland vs South and Scotland (if it leaves the United Kingdom). A bit like Liechtenstein which is part of the EEA, is politically included in Switzerland (while Switzerland is not part of either the EU or the EEA)

    i) it will not have any immigration problem, since it is not part of the Schengen Area, except in airports where it willingly allows all nationals of the Schengen Area to transit with great ease for convenience and to avoid not that they feel excluded (but only in airports, when they have already been checked and they no longer pose a problem, since they are already arriving "sorted") ...!

    j) in terms of international terrorism, political England de facto leaves the potential target of EU members (and according to which point of view we take: therefore the target of Al Q∂ed∂ C! A? This is good for Anglo-Saxons, who are more obliged to 'self-flagellate').

    k) in the event of a military conflict between the EU and Russia, England could say that it would not be concerned and could not de facto be the target of Russian missiles (although it could send a few contingents, but according to the benefit / risk principle, I would see them doing this badly ...)

    l) Last but not least, it saves time in front of Europe and therefore can arrange any provision to its advantage and see how the situation turns out, after all, it is the parliament which will decide and it is in the hands of the conservatives ...

Basically, I have the impression that we witnessed a pretty sleight of hand and everyone seems fooled.

So even if at first all this seems thoughtless and makes the English pass for idiots, it only causes an outcry momentarily, in the end, what will remain of the United Kingdom will not only have disadvantages for them, well on the contrary. They are expected to take advantage of it in my humble opinion. And I think the Conservatives have already studied all the scenarios. Could we possibly just be a war of delay in our speculations?

The fact that England (or the United Kingdom does not matter) leaving the EU does not change the economic situation in Europe - and in particular Pigs - situation always catastrophic (even if things are going a little less badly with additional debt) and in this sense they will not contribute to "pay the bill" by leaving! (Greece receives 7,5 billion and encouragement from Juncker >>>) Another big winning point for them ...!
0 x
User avatar
Philippe Schutt
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 1611
Registration: 25/12/05, 18:03
Location: Alsace
x 33

Re: Victory Brexit: consequences for Europe?




by Philippe Schutt » 02/07/16, 17:41

I also think that the least of things was to consider the 2 scenarios, and I am quite sure that Cameron did it. Junkers can only be late.
0 x
User avatar
Gaston
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 1910
Registration: 04/10/10, 11:37
x 88

Re: Victory Brexit: consequences for Europe?




by Gaston » 05/07/16, 13:35

The British government in a dead end wrote :But unlike France for example, which provides in the Constitution when and why the referendum can be used, there is no binding scope across the Channel. Certainly it will be difficult to pretend that the British had not expressed their choice. But technically, it is up to Parliament to translate this vote into law. It is up to Parliament to give Cameron the right to go to Brussels to request the departure of the EU and to play Article 50.
0 x
User avatar
Did67
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 20362
Registration: 20/01/08, 16:34
Location: Alsace
x 8685

Re: Victory Brexit: consequences for Europe?




by Did67 » 05/07/16, 15:55

OKAY. I have it all wrong then! I admit it.

And so I do not understand that Cameron does not ask the parliament, which would deny him the right to go and ask for the exit! And the case would be closed. Something escapes me ... All the ambiguity being in the "it's hard to pretend ..." and the "technically ...". Pure British juice: the referendum is not binding, but Parliament is not free to decide the opposite, but it is he who decides, while being obliged to decide as the people have decided ... Or something like that. In short, it is as they were in Europe: they were there, without being there, being for on condition of being against ...

[But it is true that the English constitution is partly unwritten and made of customs - perhaps it is a custom when the parliament does not oppose the vote of the people?]
0 x
User avatar
Obamot
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 28725
Registration: 22/08/09, 22:38
Location: regio genevesis
x 5538

Re: Victory Brexit: consequences for Europe?




by Obamot » 05/07/16, 22:41

Did67, in his example of pure British juice wrote:In short, it is as they were in Europe [...] they were there, without being there, being for on condition of being against ...

and vice versa ( : Cheesy: )
► View Text
0 x
User avatar
chatelot16
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 6960
Registration: 11/11/07, 17:33
Location: Angouleme
x 264

Re: Victory Brexit: consequences for Europe?




by chatelot16 » 06/07/16, 13:41

the situation of england is particularly wobbly ... the elected supporters of the exit from europe have resigned so as not to have to do the job of leaving europe

I am not a supporter of current europe but the solution is not to get out of it but to improve it
0 x
User avatar
sen-no-sen
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 6856
Registration: 11/06/09, 13:08
Location: High Beaujolais.
x 749

Re: Victory Brexit: consequences for Europe?




by sen-no-sen » 06/07/16, 19:54

chatelot16 wrote:the situation of england is particularly wobbly ... the elected supporters of the exit from europe have resigned so as not to have to do the job of leaving europe

I am not a supporter of current europe but the solution is not to get out of it but to improve it


The European Union was not really born of a "decision" rather than of a necessity caused by a process.
The EU is a consequence of the phenomenon of economic coalescence, it was a question of creating a broad economic field in order to maximize the profitability of the monopolistic sectors which had reached their limits within the breasts of the classic nation states.
For a system to guarantee its economic growth, it has no other solution than to push further the accumulating contradictions.
At the present time, given the accumulation of economic difficulty and its contradictions (influx of migrants, technocratic norms), a certain number of nations are turning in on themselves in order to "reconfigure themselves" (rise sovereignist, nationalist, see fascist movements).
It is also interesting to note that the EU has largely exacerbated the claims of certain provinces, some of which now want to acquire their independence (Scotland, Catalonia).
Initially the nations as we know them in Europe had a territory which had balanced itself within the world.
However if we relate the EU to the world, it clearly appears that nations, such as France, Spain for example, are now too important entities for a closed field such as the EU, which leads by invariance scale of the phenomena of "fractalisation" which favors the regions to the detriment of traditional countries.
It is with this in mind that the new regions (13 instead of the 22 in the past) as well as euro-regions have been set up:
Image
0 x
"Engineering is sometimes about knowing when to stop" Charles De Gaulle.

Back to "Economy and finance, sustainability, growth, GDP, ecological tax systems"

Who is online ?

Users browsing this forum : No registered users and 165 guests