My impression is that the Switzerland and London are banking districts of the EU. London is the dealer, Switzerland is the account. Transportation was not a factor in my thinking.
So, I am probably wrong too? Of course I am. Banking has created and ruined. It has the real power. Are there new business district's coming through based on manufacturing, wealth creating elites, from areas that had not existed. Banking creates, however will at some point call back it's investment. The EU has a purpose, Asia, the America's etc have a purpose. I risk a road of conspiracy, manufacturing, banking and Law.
We avoid Switzerland,too much hassle with the paperwork.Generally the stuff we carry is for temporary export,and if it leaves the EU we have to get an ATA Carnet for the goods.So just transiting Swiss is more hassle than it's worth,easier to go to Austria/Italy via Germany or France despite the extra fuel and time.Plus the night time truck bans and lower gross weight limits in Switzerland. One of our biggest customers has their head office in Aesch,so we have to go on occasion:sadly the Swiss customs are not the friendliest or most helpful officials I've ever met
The Swiss customs are a pain in the arse. They annoyed me once, a couple of decades ago. Since then, I have been exacting my revenge at almost every crossing.
Indeed. But decisions have consequences, and decisions taken by the Swiss people (following the uniquely Swiss system) are not immune from having adverse consequences just like decisions taken in other countries (each following their own unique systems) have consequences. Decisions like joining Schengen or not, joining the Euro or not, joining NATO or not, etc. each have their own consequences which may be good or bad for the country concerned. The fact that a decision has been taken democratically is a good thing as far as it goes, but that does not mean the effects will necessarily be beneficial.
The EU is the EU - well yes, but you don't indicate what you mean by that. Member states make their own decisions what to invest in and what not to, what to subsidise and what not to, what services to provide to their populations, how much to borrow, and many other matters. These decisions have consequences - some lead to prosperity, others not so much, and states experience varying outcomes. The EU has little enough influence over these sorts of decisions made at a national or local level. The EU does however provide a safety net of sorts, such that a state which gets into a terrible mess (as Greece famously did) can be bailed out, re-financed, and put back onto an even keel as it now is. One would have thought the people of Greece would be extremely grateful for the enormous amount of help they have received. Oddly enough it seems not, illustrating the well-known principle that gratitude is the weakest of all political motives. If Greece chose to leave it could of course do so (following the example of Greenland), but it would be a huge risk. In case of future problems, the Greeks would be on their own to sink or swim. And I fear it would most likely be sink.
been a bit of debate up here regarding the constant publication of surveys and polls and how it can influence voting. something i felt for a long time. no wonder we have so many soundbite politicians when an interviewer often only gives 3-5 seconds to answer before they interrupt, does my head in there's one on radio scotland that does my head in for this very reason. if it wasnt for snp i would vote liberal this time round.
