advertisement


Brexit: give me a positive effect... XIV

Status
Not open for further replies.
“This is not a period of adaptation, it is a rather permanent reality and fact linked to voluntary isolation and myths of sovereignty in an interdependent world. The only way out of this mess is the gradual return to cooperation with eventual discussions on new arrangements,” he added. He suggested that the UK could rejoin the European Economic Area, which includes rule-taking countries such as Norway and Iceland, which are not EU member states.
I don't for one minute believe that Britain will need 'aid' of the type he is suggesting, but the failure of the Brexiteers to understand that undoing 47 years of intertwined systems wasn't going to be 'months' or a few years fell on deaf ears. The failure to do a long term transition strategy well before plotting a referendum, is not just a disservice to the population, it is akin to a crime, with 52% willing victims aiding and abetting it!

Since I am keenly aware of the neoliberal EU, I know they think in terms similar to the psychopathic IMF. It would be very strange for an EU which 'solved' the Greek situation by enacting punitive austerity, to then want to come to the assistance of a now non-member country with free 'aid'. This is not how the EU operates. It also sends a signal that the UK cannot operate without EU structures around it, which is patently false. This is the real warning that should have been given to Brexiteers: to abandon previous incoherent economic strategies years before now. Luckily Britain doesn't have to beg for currency to be 'bailed out', so importation of some emergency supply is not an issue, but if these Tories and their opposition persist with not mobilising domestic economic power, it will be game over at some point.
 
The new Sovereignty diet starts to take hold:

"Almost nine million people, representing one in six adults in Great Britain, have not been able to buy essential food items in the past two weeks because they were not available, official research suggests."
 
You can clarify matters very quickly - and improve your mood - by confirming whether you supported Putin's annexation of Crimea or found solace in the EU's response. A 'Phone a friend' lifeline is available.
President Putin is now a friend, he pluckily stands up to aggressive EU expansionist/ hegemonistic mercantilism©. We join him in calling out these global elites.

© copyright Eternumviti, 2021
 
I don't for one minute believe that Britain will need 'aid' of the type he is suggesting, but the failure of the Brexiteers to understand that undoing 47 years of intertwined systems wasn't going to be 'months' or a few years fell on deaf ears. The failure to do a long term transition strategy well before plotting a referendum, is not just a disservice to the population, it is akin to a crime, with 52% willing victims aiding and abetting it!

Since I am keenly aware of the neoliberal EU, I know they think in terms similar to the psychopathic IMF. It would be very strange for an EU which 'solved' the Greek situation by enacting punitive austerity, to then want to come to the assistance of a now non-member country with free 'aid'. This is not how the EU operates. It also sends a signal that the UK cannot operate without EU structures around it, which is patently false. This is the real warning that should have been given to Brexiteers: to abandon previous incoherent economic strategies years before now. Luckily Britain doesn't have to beg for currency to be 'bailed out', so importation of some emergency supply is not an issue, but if these Tories and their opposition persist with not mobilising domestic economic power, it will be game over at some point.
I wouldn't get too steamed up about it: this is just Stubb, who is an anglophile but doesn't represent anybody much these days (and certainly not the EC or any other institution), trying to generate a bit of buzz for himself by teasing Telegraph readers. The EU will certainly not be making any moves of the sort.
 
I would hope that the press (in terms of general public discussion) would stop defaulting to predictions of collapse, then tagging onto the end: we need to rejoin now! Or some such. The deed is done and the job now is to solve it.

It would be a lot better if they would generate discussion on why the public seems to think hiring essential labour (such as essential supply drivers) on worthwhile terms is an inflation disaster and that this (were it even true) is more catastrophic than not being able to move or supply anything. It is always the task of government to step in where the private sector can't/won't and especially in emergency situations.
Instead the government is dicking about hoping that tinkering nonsense and 'market forces' will somehow spur private business to do something they never do: pay people a fair wage AND ensure decent working conditions. They have no interest in it and say they can't 'afford' it. The claims from business lobbies on the media contradicts what drivers say and unions say about unsuitable conditions and contracts.

The short-term solution is to directly employ any driver willing to drive, for a new floor wage and guaranteed suitable working conditions. This is not 'crowding out', it is using resources the private sector won't (or says it 'cannot'). The long-term solution is to eliminate the financial barrier to becoming an essential worker: directly train people to be a driver. To eliminate future problems and not be panicking about how to 'attract immigrant labour' which is also not an endless resource.

If these employed people are then to transfer back to the private sector, as is desirable for some, that sector must then meet the same conditions. You then bypass all the quibbling nonsense about legislating working conditions, begging for fair wages, 'price-wage' battles etc. Two other observations on this: forget 'market forces', prices, are in the chain, a function of what government is prepared to pay; government needs to cease the fiscal rectitude and unemployment buffer stock nonsense which maintains the low wage, low growth that keeps the private sector in a cost-cutting mentality.
 
So many problems to overcome in the scenario you present Le Baron.
Time is of the essence here, putting in proper infrastructure, making it secure, making conditions attractive, paying proper wages, reform of the drivers contracts and training of new drivers to the correct standard etc etc.

The Tories are not in that space. As you have outlined no planning was put in place for Brexit. Probably multiple reasons. Lack of will, ignorance, lack of caring, specialist knowledge and the big reason is these people made their own preparations to get around Brexit or have so much wealth Brexit was never going to be an inconvenience.

You mentioned up thread that the EU is neo-liberal organization. Whilst one can obviously see the lobbying of big business and wealthy individuals in some of the actions of the EU I am unaware of any other group of countries who collectively have more social protections and a general high quality of life for the majority of their citizens.

For the UK to go it alone they needed imho something special to differentiate themselves and also be planning and moving towards that goal for a long time. Norway got their oil find and it would appear used it in a fashion to benefit their population. Don't think one could say the same thing about the UK.
Germany and France have as far as I can see and understand moved themselves up the value chain in terms of automation, quality of jobs and social provision. A lot of their original manufacturing has moved to China but also to Spain and the Czech republic for example. This has benefited Germany/France but also benefited the other countries.
What has the UK done in all that time? It doesn't appear to have followed the German/French model. It appears to me on a simplistic level that financial engineering and fast boom bust industry is what the UK specialize in.

Given the above remaining in the EU and trying to replica the policies followed by their peers was the best option.
 
You mentioned up thread that the EU is neo-liberal organization. Whilst one can obviously see the lobbying of big business and wealthy individuals in some of the actions of the EU I am unaware of any other group of countries who collectively have more social protections and a general high quality of life for the majority of their citizens.
The EU's entire central economic policy (the so-called 'stability and growth pact' which relies upon government-led austerity and business cycle booms/busts) is pure monetarism/neo-liberalism. Right now it is temporarily suspended due to first the 2008 crash and latterly Covid; since they know it doesn't work, but are reluctant to abandon it.
The 'quality of life' thing is something that flutters around Twitter a lot when people are angry about leaving the EU. Usually from people who lived temporarily in places like Amsterdam or Paris or Frankfurt with some financial job or as a student, and had a bit of cash to throw around. It's not real life. There are lots of poor people in the EU, even in the top members designated as 'rich countries'. The latest stream of reports now making a dent in the press here in the Netherlands are the type of thing usually ignored, but which were always being published. That in a country of roughly 17+ million about 3 million are 'officially' in poverty and that additional numbers have serious financial and/or housing problems and precarious work. The wealth gap here has never been so wide, despite it not being equal to that of the UK. It's a far cry from the common picture. This is replicated in France, Germany, Italy, Spain...

The suspension of the central econ approach of the ECB has allowed member countries to marginally raise their deficit spending, but 40-odd years of economic brainwashing makes them reluctant and fearful about doing so. Anything spent in the Covid period is looked at as a nefarious mountain waiting to collapse back on everyone in a future avalanche. And this is only stability spending! Investment spending doesn't even figure in their logic (if one can even give it that worthy appellation).
 
Stuck for time so just a quick question. Where is doing it better or more fairly than the EU?

I accept there are high levels of poverty throughout the EU. Not nice but there is no hiding from it
 
The EU's entire central economic policy (the so-called 'stability and growth pact' which relies upon government-led austerity and business cycle booms/busts) is pure monetarism/neo-liberalism. Right now it is temporarily suspended due to first the 2008 crash and latterly Covid; since they know it doesn't work, but are reluctant to abandon it.
The 'quality of life' thing is something that flutters around Twitter a lot when people are angry about leaving the EU. Usually from people who lived temporarily in places like Amsterdam or Paris or Frankfurt with some financial job or as a student, and had a bit of cash to throw around. It's not real life. There are lots of poor people in the EU, even in the top members designated as 'rich countries'. The latest stream of reports now making a dent in the press here in the Netherlands are the type of thing usually ignored, but which were always being published. That in a country of roughly 17+ million about 3 million are 'officially' in poverty and that additional numbers have serious financial and/or housing problems and precarious work. The wealth gap here has never been so wide, despite it not being equal to that of the UK. It's a far cry from the common picture. This is replicated in France, Germany, Italy, Spain...

The suspension of the central econ approach of the ECB has allowed member countries to marginally raise their deficit spending, but 40-odd years of economic brainwashing makes them reluctant and fearful about doing so. Anything spent in the Covid period is looked at as a nefarious mountain waiting to collapse back on everyone in a future avalanche. And this is only stability spending! Investment spending doesn't even figure in their logic (if one can even give it that worthy appellation).
Not that about the "poverty in the EU" bit. Of course there is some, but less so than the UK in my experience. This is based on 3 years in manufacturing in rural western France, admittedly 15 years ago.
 
Stuck for time so just a quick question. Where is doing it better or more fairly than the EU?

I accept there are high levels of poverty throughout the EU. Not nice but there is no hiding from it
The question seems to me not right. The 'least worst' option can't really be deemed the best. I don't even think they are the least worst, economically speaking. The monetarist culture has been exported worldwide, by choice or not, so the picture is difficult, but the EU chose it even though they have the power to do so much better.

Political union is good. Even trade agreement is good. Monetary union is and has been a disaster and people who warned about that way back in the 80s/90s before it occurred (like Charles Goodhart, Wynn Godley) have been proved right.
 
Not that about the "poverty in the EU" bit. Of course there is some, but less so than the UK in my experience. This is based on 3 years in manufacturing in rural western France, admittedly 15 years ago.
Try living in urban Brussels or one of the French banlieues or areas outside the economic centres in any country. I mean as someone with no access to capital. It doesn't even make sense that governments could spend 40 years strangling spending and that people do better. Development isn't equal. In places like Drenthe here you have people from there who suffer the fact that most economic activity is in the Randstad (and even that uneven), and then those who make a lot of money and move to Drenthe where houses are cheaper and live the high life. It skews perceptions.
 
Try living in urban Brussels or one of the French banlieues or areas outside the economic centres in any country. I mean as someone with no access to capital. It doesn't even make sense that governments could spend 40 years strangling spending and that people do better. Development isn't equal. In places like Drenthe here you have people from there who suffer the fact that most economic activity is in the Randstad (and even that uneven), and then those who make a lot of money and move to Drenthe where houses are cheaper and live the high life. It skews perceptions.
Yes, I appreciate that. Rather like living in Grimsby, or Bradford, or Barnsley. I know all three, and the tougher bits of Nantes, for that matter, and my observations stand.
 
Yes, I appreciate that. Rather like living in Grimsby, or Bradford, or Barnsley. I know all three, and the tougher bits of Nantes, for that matter, and my observations stand.
Not quite though, because the common tack - among people angry about Brexit - is to imply that in Europe things are always doing so much better, when they really aren't.

I can tell you, I am angry as f#ck about Brexit, it has left me in a position where I have no voting rights in the UK or NL. I think it was a shambles, but this will not make me think the EU is a fine institution because it isn't. Which is why I do not fall into line with those people who see all the genuine disasters of Brexit and then jump to the conclusion that the EU is somehow comparative luxury. The misery of the UK is entirely home-grown and was in force all the time the UK was an EU member. Much more than Greece's misery because they really were handicapped monetarily and in terms of clout.
 
I can tell you, I am angry as f#ck about Brexit, it has left me in a position where I have no voting rights in the UK or NL. I think it was a shambles, but this will not make me think the EU is a fine institution because it isn't. Which is why I do not fall into line with those people who see all the genuine disasters of Brexit and then jump to the conclusion that the EU is somehow comparative luxury.

That's a Brexiteer narrative. The referendum wasn't a question about whether the EU was beyond reproach - the question before the UK people was whether the UK was better off inside the EU or out.

To really decide it was, you would have to believe that the UK was well prepared and ready to be suddenly isolated from it's biggest market and closest trading partners. Instead, we got an emotionally charged set of protests, part anti UK government austerity, part anti-immigration and part perverse zero sum accounting with a lack of appreciation of what EU contributions actually buy you.
 
That's the Brexiteer narrative. The referendum wasn't a question about whether the EU was beyond reproach - the question before the UK people was whether the UK was better off inside the EU or out.

To really decide you would have to believe that the UK was well prepared and ready to be suddenly isolated from it's biggest market and closest trading partners. Instead, we got an emotionally charged set of protests, part anti UK government austerity, part anti-immigration and part perverse zero sum accounting and lack of appreciation of what EU contributions actually buy you.
That’s right, a movement led by some of the greatest political philosophers of the day- Nigel Farage, Mark Francois, Arron Banks and John Redwood.
 
That's the Brexiteer narrative. The referendum wasn't a question about whether the EU was beyond reproach - the question before the UK people was whether the UK was better off inside the EU or out.

To really decide you would have to believe that the UK was well prepared and ready to be suddenly isolated from it's biggest market and closest trading partners. Instead, we got an emotionally charged set of protests, part anti UK government austerity, part anti-immigration and part perverse zero sum accounting and lack of appreciation of what EU contributions actually buy you.
I already made the argument myself that the terms of the vote were propagandised and skewed and that the Brian line of argument is invalid. My view is not "the Brexiteer narrative". It is a separate (though related) issue of the fundamental problem of the EU. The critique I am giving is that the 'EU benefits' are immediately defaulted to by most people who opposed Brexit. Not the UK's privileged membership status, but the concept of the EU. Something which reflects the fundamental problem at the heart of both UK and EU economic problems.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.


advertisement


Back
Top