eurealist.co.uk

Loose the Delusion interestingly but not surprisingly is suggesting that typical Eusceptics are hypocrites! I don’t know if that is an improvement on “Slant Eyed Loons but they do say that when they descend to insults they have already lost the argument. If a post is peppered with insults then it surely means that an attempt is being made to sway the argument away from a reasoned debate towards a personal attack, of course when the Sun does this it is evidence of Eurosceptic xenophobia, but when those who promote the EU cast insults about like confetti, it is only right and proper, I mean anyone who disagrees with the EU must be deserving of insults, because self-evidently they must be mad or delusional or xenophobic or slant eyed loons this goes without saying and of course no evidence need be offered.

Anyway the “Square Eyed Loons” now seem to think that it is being hypocritical to oppose the EU and at the same time oppose the break up of Britain

“One of the things that I really dislike about your typical Eurosceptic is that they appropriate? a notion of ‘Britishness’ as a cover for what really amounts to parochial Englishness”

Already you see we don’t mean what we say, there is an ulterior motive we are in fact no more than narrow minded little Englanders, this is suggested without a single shred of evidence to back up the contention.

Apart from the dedicated Eurosceptic sites, it is interesting that a number of the other ‘British’ blogs that rant and rave about Europe seem to have the word English prominently displayed in the title.

So to question is to rant and rave

“Anyway, I have always wondered how these English Eurosceptics, who seem to adore the British union, would respond when faced with the same arguments from Scots or Welsh nationalists as they deploy against Europe: the right to exercise national sovereignty, the right to rule themselves, the lack of democracy, the imposition of regulations from outside, etc.”

So we have built up a nice little argument a typical Eusceptic is a narrow minded little Englander hiding behind a concept of Britishness they rant and rave and are hypocrites to boot.
Let us add in a bit more spice to the mix and the odd insult and see what we get

“please welcome what might well be the first Scottish Nationalist Party (SNP)/Scottish nationalist blog: Independence. Let’s see how well the loons can fight their own arguments! My bet is that they can’t. By their logic, if British should have a right to leave Europe then Scotland must have a right to leave Britain”

So we have our argument mapped out for us, and not only that but Loose the Delusion has kindly gone to the trouble and sorted out the logic of our argument as well.

Of course the “Square Eyed Loons” tend to forget that this is not our argument, it is not our logic, we are not English we are British, officially in the British government there is no recognition of Englishness.

In order to assist, perhaps the SEL`s would like to consider that it was the British government with representatives of both Scotland and Wales that took Britain as one unit, into the EU and it was a British referendum that allowed the British people the choice to stay within the Common Market, and it is going to be the British people that will choose to accept or reject the EU Constitution so we must argue for withdrawal of Britain not England, Scotland and Wales.

These individual kingdoms are not in fact members of the EU in there own right so there is no inconsistence in opposing devolution at this stage, because self evidently if Britain were to be divided into its constituent parts it would then be impossible for Britain to withdraw, because it would in effect no longer exist.

However if the time arises when the Scottish or the Welsh people decide that they no longer wish to be part of the UK, I do not think you will find Eusceptics standing up to deny them their right to be governed by the people they elect, by their own laws, under their own parliament, that they control. Instead it will be the kind people who believe that government should not be the business of the people, the people should have no say in who runs their country, and no rights to remove their own government, in fact the kind of people who actually believe that the EU is a democratic institution. For proof exatly who is it that would deny us, the British peoples the right to govern ourselves by our laws etc.

Edit: This Should be “Swivel Eyed Loons”

The Scotsman
Tsunami-hit Thais told: Buy six planes or face EU tariffs

FRASER NELSON
POLITICAL EDITOR
TSUNAMI-struck Thailand has been told by the European Commission that it must buy six A380 Airbus aircraft if it wants to escape the tariffs against its fishing industry.

While millions of Europeans are sending aid to Thailand to help its recovery, trade authorities in Brussels are demanding that Thai Airlines, its national carrier, pays £1.3 billion to buy its double-decker aircraft.

The demand will come as a deep embarrassment to Peter Mandelson, the trade commissioner, whose officials started the negotiation before the disaster struck Thailand - killing tens of thousands of people and damaging its economy.

While aid workers from across Europe are helping to rebuild Thai livelihoods, trade officials in Brussels are concluding a jets-for-prawns deal, which they had hoped to announce next month.

As the world’s largest producer of prawns, Thailand has become so efficient that its wares are half the price of those caught by Norway, the main EU prawn producer.

To ensure the Thais cannot compete, EU officials five years ago removed its shrimp industry from the EU’s generalised system of preferential tariffs - designed to share Western wealth with developing countries by trade.

The EU has instead slapped a tariff of 12 per cent on its fish - three times that imposed on prawns from Malaysia, its neighbour. This is still less than the US tariff on Thai prawns: 97 per cent.

The prawn tax is one in a series of protectionist measures expected to cost east Asia some £130 million each year - money being taken from its economies while EU citizens donate millions in charity.

Five days after the tsunami struck, the EU legislated against Thailand by slapping a new tariff designed to extinguish its booming trade in cumarin, a plant extract used in perfume.

(AGI) - Rome, Italy, Jan.18 - The Northern League is against the bill for the ratification of the European Constitution, currently being debated at the Lower House. “Ratifying it would be a bad mistake - said whip Alessandro Ce’ - we need to discuss it more in depth, and we want a referendum too”. “There is a limit to popular sovereignty, the citizens have never been included in this process”.

This is obviously evidence of the lack of a mandate the EU has, no one ever bothers to ask the people, they do however make a lot of noise about democracy, almost one could believe that talking constantly about democracy is in some minds the equivalent of democracy.

Germany and France who pushed hard for the Pact before the euro was launched in 1999, seeing it as a warranty for the euro which would discourage profligate spending by governments. Have not been able to meet their own criteria for maintaining the three-percent requirement for countries using the common euro currency.

Germany, undaunted by criticism from its own central bank, pursued a campaign to loosen the strictures of the Stability Pact so that governments are not systematically subjected to disciplinary procedures when deficits exceed three percent of gross domestic product, the limit enshrined by the Pact.

As the Pact was designed to prevent governments from running up excessive debts and to protect the euro it has not been possible for the big two to meet the commitment so itt is being reviewed after an economic downturn and repeated breaches of the limits it sets for national deficits, above all by Germany and France, How ever
whilst the EU Finance Ministers have agreed have agreed with a recommendation by EU Finance Commissioner Joaquin Almunia. to pursue disciplinary action against Greece for failing to meet its commitments they have also agreed not to do so for guess who? Yes that’s right France and Germany apparently although they to have failed to meet the limit set by the pact at some time in the future possibility this year they are expected to fall into line. Of course if they do not then perhaps they will next year or the year after that.

So EU officials say Greece could face financial sanctions if it fails to meet its commitment. And EU officials say France and Germany will not face financial sanctions for failing to meet their commitments on the same day, its good to know that the rules are being applied in and even handed manner.

“The euro is now six years old. It is past time to consider how it is performing, and whether it has lived up to the expectations that accompanied its birth.

Those expectations were not modest. By reducing transaction costs and removing exchange-rate uncertainty, the single European currency was expected to lead to fully integrated product and financial markets. This, in turn, would bring greater gains from trade, stronger competition, larger cross-border capital flows, lower borrowing costs, and more opportunities for sharing risk, all of which were expected ultimately to boost investment and productivity”.

So says Professor Guido Tabellini Professor of Economics at Bocconi University in Milan President of the Innocenzo Gasparini Institute of Economic Research in this report in the: “Building on the euro” printed in the Daily Times (Pakistan)

Tabellini goes on “Reality has disappointed. Compared to the five years before the euro’s launch in 1999, productivity growth has since slowed in Italy, Germany, Spain, and the Netherlands, while over the same period it accelerated or remained constant in Denmark, Sweden, and the UK, the European Union members that remained out. Indeed, with the main exception of France, the euro does not seem to have been a blessing for the countries that adopted it.

Why this disappointment? Have the expected benefits of the new currency failed to materialize? Several recent economic studies addressed this question, looking at a variety of indicators”.

The single currency has boosted international trade within the euro area, by about 10% although a larger effect was expected, No evidence exists that the euro has increased price transparency, Although Cross-border investment towards the euro area has increased it is difficult to disentangle the effect of the single currency from other concomitant events (such as privatisations or corporate mergers).
Money and bond markets are now fully integrated in the euro area, Retail banking, however, remains segmented by national borders, smaller produces not been much affected.There has been a surge in euro-denominated international bonds, but the liquidity of foreign-exchange markets is no higher for the euro compared to the national currencies it replaced, and the euro remains a long way from challenging the supremacy of the dollar.

The report accepts that although the Euro has some problems it was never just an economic project and its backers’ main motives was to boost Europe’s political integration. And the euro has become a symbol of European unity; however this symbol has not made the EU or the euro area any more popular.

What is clear is that the revolution took place on shaky national economic foundations, transforming the upper floors of the European economy – financial markets and macroeconomic policy institutions – while leaving intact the ancient underpinnings of supply-side distortions induced by misguided national policies in the 1970’s and 1980’s.

It is these distortions, not any shortcomings of the single currency, and account for the euro area’s dismal economic performance. The countries that adopted the euro had poor labour-market institutions, bloated pension systems, high taxes on labour income, and inefficient service sectors in the late 1990’s, and they still do now.

The report concludes we do not know whether the EU and the single market would have survived without the single currency, Overhauling Europe’s shaky supply-side foundations are the key challenge facing the euro revolution, and it is a challenge that needs to be addressed at its national-level roots.