9th most prosperous country in the world with very few natural resources. 4 or the 10 are oil-producing Gulf states Norway is similarly a large oil producer. Ranked no. 8 in the list of total patents applied for - the largest number per head of the population. So it's not all banking. The UK is number 7, with 8 times the population. Swiss prosperity comes in large part from the excellent political system. But no doubt it is easier to sneer from the oh-so-rosy UK.
Well it seems that it actually accounts for nearly half of UK overseas trade, 48.6% Open Europe blog: New figures show that 51.4% of UK goods exports are sent outside the EU and we run an EU trade deficit – does that tell us anything? You going to be a bit hard to believe, johnv, if you just invent facts to suit your arguments. If we run a trade deficit with the EU, is this surprising? After all, I run a deficit on here with the amount of Likes I get, versus the ones I give. This seems normal to me. There are lots of contributors to get a like from me, and only one of me to receive them. Ditto the situation with the EU. Of course, if all the buyers of German cars want to start buying British, maybe things will change...
Yep I'm sneering from my debt ridden, pay for everyone else, controlled by Europe country. And Swiss are what exactly, independent per chance?! Erm...and how much wealth comes from hoarding and hiding away the ill gotten, and tax dodged, money from others around the world? So what have the Swiss ever done for me? Or the 3rd world? Or the people being gassed and poisoned by their own leaders? I'm sure there are loads but this little islander hasn't seen any of it...
The frequently repeated argument about international trade is rubbish. Speaking with 30 odd years experience as an importer and exporter I can tell you that there are plenty of non EU countries that trade with the EU without duty being applied . These are political decisions and not compulsory just because you are in or out of the EU. Google EU free trade South Korea for example. Regardless of whether we run a trade deficit or surplus with the rest of the EU there is no need to impose trade restrictions on either side. The fact that we run a deficit means that the rest of the EU would be unwise to impose restrictions as they would be hurting their own exports and as a final point of interest, next year the EU is removing duty on imports of some cotton products made in Pakistan in an attempt to increase employment there and supposedly help in the fight against extremism and not because Pakistan is about to join the EU. If we do ever leave and others follow and the EU collapses so what ? Life existed before the EU, it currently exists outside the EU, life will go on.All those that say this will happen or that will happen are just guessing and often have an agenda . That applies to both sides of the argument. Get the facts and hope for a vote.
Do we really have to go through all this again? Have you really forgotten everything from previous threads? Oh well, here goes. The five principal institutions of the EU comprise the Parliament, the Council, the Court, the Presidency, and the Commission. * The European Parliament comprises MEPs elected directly by the peoples of all 28 members states. The President of the Parliament is elected by the MEPs - but is more the equivalent of the Speaker in the UK, who is likewise elected by the MPs. * The Council comprises the governments of the 28 member states, all of which are democratically elected by a variety of systems. The heads of governments (mainly Prime Ministers) are the main Council, and committees of the Council comprise the ministers for the relevant subjects in the 28 elected governments. * The Court comprises judges appointed by agreement between the members states. They are "unelected" - as are all the judges in all the members states. The President of the Court is the most senior of the judges. * The EU Presidency is held for 6 months at a time by each member state on a rotating basis. The elected government of the presidency takes the lead in organising inter-governmental events during its term. * The Commission comprises Commissioners each appointed by the elected governments of the members states, and the President of the Commission is appointed by consensus between the members states. The function of the Commission is to implement the Treaties ratified by the members states, to implement decisions of the Council, the Parliament, the Court, and the Presidency and to provide administrative support for the institutions. To put it simply, all the assertions you have made contrary to the above are misconceived.
That is more or less what I said. Only the Commission makes the decisions which are then voted in by Parliament. All of the rest is, as you say, froth. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-19598581 The last few seconds is really interesting.
so its too big to influence how it works or know how it works or even care how it works? similar questions getting askd up here all the time, the noo.
A very pragmatic approach finm Maybe it is one I should adopt. The bottom line is we are just bumping our gums here. My only democratic input is to vote in a constituency that has returned a conservative for decades, the only exception being a brief period with the LibDems after the by-election following the death of Willie Whitelaw (you have to be over a certain age to know who he was), the conservative then won at the next general election. With 60% of seats being safe seats and candidates being selected by local party activists (Falkirk !) there is very little democratic accountability, which I think is where Lucaz was going with post #14.
Right so to get it correct just like some countries that produce goods which are not worth/not possible to make in EU get import duties exception so will UK? So remind me which goods are made in UK that EU countries cannot produce them self? What do we have that they would need? Those exceptions are political reasons at the face but looking deeper money talks. Those exceptions were drafted because EU needed something or needed market of X country to be opened to them due to business potential (short or long term business). Also all are skipping important factor. You all assume EU government is illegal, so by definition not biased, corrupted possibly. If you suddenly leave why do you think they will play nice if you got no carrot to offer?
The Swiss are about as independent as they can be, given that they are a small landlocked country with only a small amount of muscle. This inevitably means that when the US says "bend over", the Swiss say "how far"? And then have to bend over a bit more a few months later. They have a lot of bilateral agreements with the EU. They might not like all of them, but once again, they know where the real power lies. Beyond that, they are neutral - which makes them quite independent. Lots of wealth has come from banking dodgy money. But then, a lot of money is dodgy. The City of London is no great example in this respect. But my point was that the Swiss have a lot of ideas and turn those ideas into wealth - hence the patents applications. It's not all banking. I have no idea what the Swiss have done for you personally, probably nothing. But they do a good deal more for the 3rd world than they should. They have always seen themselves as a "Terre d'asile" and accepting asylum seekers has been a national tradition. That's why the larger cities are awash with Africans despite the Swiss never having had any colonies and owing the right of abode to no one in the 3rd World. During the war in Kosovo, the Swiss took in more refugees from that country than any other country, despite the small size of their territory. The Swiss also started the Red Cross and still hosts the organisation, which is staffed mainly by the Swiss. They also try to provide a neutral ground for international negotiations between fractious countries. In fact the Swiss do a sight more for world peace than most places, and pick up more of the pieces when it goes pear-shaped than their fair share. But if you want to loathe the place, that's fine by me! :smile:
Nowt wrong with a bit of forum argy-bargy! No, the point I was trying to make is that Switzerland may not be squeaky clean (about the only squeaky clean place would appear to be New Zealand) but the Swiss generally get a bad rap from everyone despite not going to other countries to colonise them or getting involved in any wars. They did lots of that in the past (Vatican guards to this day) and saw the error of their ways... But it does go to illustrate what I was saying above. If ever the media report on Switerzerland, or anywhere else really, they never get beyond a few clichés. What do most people know about Sweden (myself included) - Ikea and Abba? Poland? A place that gets invaded a lot with a big bolshy shipyard. Even Belgium, which is very close to the UK? - A couple of languages and some good beer. Suppose the same level of knowledge for Scotland - an odd national dish (haggis) and they invented the Macintosh. The fact is that the British ignorance of Europe (that'll be both the media and state education's fault) is woeful. How can you expect to get on with partners in a joint project if you don't really know the first thing about them? Or care?
The other way of looking at it is if you don't care why form a partnership, and that applies to both sides. Continental Europe is a great place but I don't feel the need for economic and political integration with them.
Because the history of Europe up to a few decades ago has been one of continual strife, war and destruction and it seemed a good idea to work with ourselves rather than against each other. Having only lived in peace time, there probably aren't that many people on here who would get that. The world wars created a real traumatism. It's easy now to think European integration was a nefarious project. It wasn't. It has been born of a real determination to do better than in the past. What we have got can no doubt be massively improved, but it's a bit sad to just say "don't like it" and give up. A bit like feeding a kid exclusively on sausages and mash because he doesn't immediately like pesto.
Luca, I think you may have missed the point of what I was saying . I doubt that very much private money, individuals or companies, make a decision about what goods they will buy based on whether the goods were manufactured in the EU or not. More likely to be quality, value, suitability, availability etc that is the deciding factor. If for example you need to buy a new bucket , do you decide in advance to buy the finest Eu produced bucket possible or do you just pop down to Wilkinsons and buy the nice shiny red one ? There are plenty of products made in Britain, they may not be needed but that doesn't mean they are not wanted. Being in the EU does not make anybody want one any more or less than being out of the EU . If they compare well with the competition they will sell, if they don't they wont. You helpfully say that EU drafts legislation when they need something. Has it occurred that the EU may need and want access to the 60 million strong British market ? That is a big carrot. We don't all assume EU government is illegal, how can you say something like that ? You don't speak for everyone. Only politicians do that ! Remember that we already trade all over the world and I can tell you from experience it is a piece of cake to deal with most other countries. There are a few exceptions, such as Iran, but in the main there are very few problems. I personally import from China, Pakistan, India, Egypt, Turkey, Brazil, Portugal and Ireland (republic) and export to Japan, Dubai, Spain, Malta, Nigeria, Gambia, Finland, Barbados, USA and Norfolk !
So why not have trade agreements, cultural exchanges etc. Why do we need economic and political integration. Being generous I might concede that the EU was born with good intentions but tell that to the Greeks, the Spaniards et al. I buy into the belief that the EU is probably doomed and an orderly withdrawal would be better than a disorderly collapse. What's pesto ? That last bit was a joke.
