The EU will ultimately fail

The blue states have been subsidizing the red states since forever...

OP, the Northern states have no choice. The EU is not a 'democracy'. In order for the electorates of the Northern states to wrench support away from the Southern states, they would have to leave the EU itself.

There is no way, while they remain in the EU, to effect that level of fundamental change because the decision-making apparatus of the EU is not directly connected to the national electorates: the EU Parliament, for example, is an advisory debate chamber, not a law-making entity.

And leaving the EU, as we see in Britain, that has not proven to be remotely easy even when you get the votes to do so.

OP is a Brexit troll who is looking for new horizons now that the UK has fucked itself.

The EU is fucked without Britain and the Blue States do not subsidize the red states. You know little about economics. California alone is a drain because it's unfunded debt is such a mess, it cancels out all its productivity. And that is just ONE TINY economic item.

You need to look at totality in the states as well as the EU. The EU has Germany and to a lesser degree the Netherlands as an economic stronghold. France is a basketcase like California, which at first glance looks good but is just crud underneath.

OP the same can be said for the US north and south

I gather even Jeremy Corbyn said it was going to be a disaster from back in the 70s. I've heard this from other people too. It begins with the premise that nations and regions within in nations can all be governed from a far. A grand wizard if you will.

Banks and tech giants love it because they can screw up, suck up to govts and they're too big to fail. Somehow this is considered ok, even progressive and people who oppose it are considered backward. But it clearly wasn't always that way. Someone explained to me MPs can't actually pass laws. They have to go thru a delegate in Brussels that nobody voted for.

So if there are flaws in the system that they implement everyone suffers, everyone goes down.

Whomever UK gets in, the housing situation is still poor, NIH is still in dire straits and instead of making crap deals with EU, they'll make crap deals with the US.

Hi guys. I'm a NASTY PUS-FILLED TROLL in Yekaterinburg and I'm hammering my rank gash with a empty bottle of Adidas shampoo while I type this.

R4 no the Divided Kingdom is fucked without the EU, did you read the news today? Barnier and Frost were pretty clear. They’re most likely not getting a deal and if they get one it won’t be a beneficial one for them. They have a huge poor working class already compared to other northern EU countries and it will become much worse.

R2 the one thing I could see happening is a northern and southern euro, then the north would have lower currency inflation.

R2 the one thing I could see happening is a northern and southern euro, then the north would have lower currency inflation.

The EU tried to go too far, too fast, and then 2008 and subsequently the Greek debt crisis, the PIIGS stagnation, and now this.

Germany or The Netherlands will take advantage of “first mover advantage” when the ECB can no longer paper over the massive imbalances.

The FTZ might survive, but the euro is a dead currency.

R6 - Corbyn is a dyed in the wool eurosceptic and voted against every single treaty. He only supported REMAIN in order to shore up Labour's vote in that quarter, and he did so in so lacklustre a way (talking about staying in a "reformed Europe" that everyone knew was never going to happen) that he damned it with faint praise. His voting record speaks for itself. It's about the only thing I agreed with him on: another neo-liberal old boys corporatist club.

The EU's problems keep getting papered over but there are some serious issues ahead, some of which are not only afflicting the EU, notably printing money at a dangerous rate and taking on massive debt. It has no central unified financial system and currency, and that is another huge problem. The migration issue is also going to dog it, and Italy's and Germany's banking systems are a danger.

The EU is a trading bloc dressed up as a country, but it doesn't have an army, can't enforce and protect its borders, and failed miserably in the 2015 migrant crisis thanks to Merkel's fantasies, which gave the far right an early Christmas gift it couldn't have hoped for in its wildest dreams.

That's all in addition to the richer north/poorer south split.

Brexit covered up quite a bit and deflected lots of attention. After seeing that massive (although reduced by the protests of The Netherlands and the other "Frugal" Countries) "grants" package with vague references to "new own sources" and the next thing on the fall agenda being another shot at forcing members to take assigned numbers of Third World migrants, or fining them, as the Visegrad Group digs its heels in and says, No Fucking Way . . .

You may be sure lots of Brits are muttering, "Thank God we're out of it."

The printing of money and "grants" and debt the EU are taking on with this package is farcical.

I don’t know why the UK is such a sore loser. Suck it up. Don’t pretend all of us don’t know what the consequences are. The largest part of the economy depends on EU trade. The economical benefits the UK had will be no more. Germany and the Netherlands, Scandinavia too can much more easily handle a parting with the UK since the nations are economically stronger and always have been the past decades.

R13 the EU still has to come to an agreement about the new budget for the upcoming years. They will be taking the pandemic into account. I’m sure they will figure something out. I’m not an EU fan but they are not idiots who will go bankrupt over this pandemic.

The thing is it appears that UKs problems have increased as part of the EU and will continue to the further away they get from a system that allows small areas to get direct representation. Fishermen in Cornwall (who were screwed by Brussels), say, have somewhat different concerns than Eastside of London. Top down doesn't work.

Until they go after big banks (like Iceland did), instead of bailing them out, ban corporations in local areas --people do nicely setting up their own local shops w/o real estate investors coming in causing rents to raise-- nothing will change. The govt should concern itself with the pitiful state of the NIH and building solid, safe low cost housing. And stay out of wars. They cost a lot, kill a lot and cause mass immigration and misery.

As for trade. I don't know are Iceland or Norway shut out? And isn't Germany's biggest bank in trouble?

R16 - If you were talking about Britain, it's NHS, not NIH - you're clearly American. Norway, Iceland, and Lichtenstein are in the EEA (European Economic Area) which allows them to be in the single market, but not as part of the EU. Just the same, they have to obey most EU rules on the free movement of people, goods, and labour.

For a thorough look at the EU's alarming financial approach, I'd recommend a recent article called, "Will the Pandemic Bring Down the Eurozone?"

From MSN News. Excerpt below:

" . . .No eurozone government has openly declared insolvency during the coronavirus pandemic, but the European Central Bank has undertaken massive financial injections to avoid just that.

On top of this money printing, European governments have been spending like drunken sailors. Germany alone has committed €1.2 trillion in spending and guarantees, more than any other individual EU country. There is a real danger that German support for domestic firms undermines fair competition in the European Union, which its executive, the European Commission, is supposed to guarantee, although in this case it has remained silent.

Recently, European governments agreed to an additional €750 billion in COVID-related stimulus spending, dubbed “Next Generation EU,” which will add yet more to the burden already imposed on hard-pressed European taxpayers. The €750 billion will be borrowed on international markets — perhaps even from China —and jointly guaranteed by European governments, a development of considerable political significance in that it effectively represents a degree of debt mutualization that has thus far been resisted by the EU’s “north.” To pay back the jointly issued loans, the European Commission will be levying taxes directly, an encroachment on powers previously reserved to the members. With a “tax on non-recycled plastic waste” already levied on January 1, a “carbon border adjustment mechanism and a digital levy” may follow.

In Northern Europe, opposition to this spending scheme was firm, as governments realized the extra burden it would put on their national budgets already stretched by the measures taken in response to the pandemic.

The so-called “frugal four” — the fiscally responsible Netherlands, Austria, Sweden, and Denmark — are hesitant to put themselves on the hook for decades of financial mismanagement elsewhere. . . .

An agreement was already reached that the new multiannual EU budget, not including the €750 billion special “coronavirus” stimulus, would once again amount to more than €1 trillion euro over seven years, despite the loss of the UK, which was the EU budget’s second biggest net contributor.

Germany, and ultimately the frugal four, are likely to back down in the end when it comes to both regular and post-COVID EU spending. The waste (and worse) associated with EU funds is no secret, but it is often considered as some kind of a “bribe” to sustain the EU’s “single market,” which enables businesses to trade across borders more smoothly in Europe.

. . . Taxes are already excruciatingly high in financially weaker countries like France, Belgium, Greece, Italy, Portugal and Spain. The economic damage of Covid is now crushing tax revenue.

For a long time, German political opposition to the ECB’s monetary activism, stemming from the trauma of 20th century hyperinflation, acted as a brake, but memories are fading."

There is a great deal of detail in the article, but it's worth a read.

The "south" of the EU acts as buffer for the immigrant flood. They get paid to keep the immigrants and also keep most of them from moving north.

R12 that would be The Netherlands, as Germany wouldn’t dare, still plagued by its never ending guilt

Thank you R17, very informative and a lot to chew on. I gather that however you slice it there's going to be massive debt piled on. And you're right I meant 'NHS', I have 'NIH' coming out of my ears at this point.

It's not about migrants anymore. They've slowed to a trickle and pre-COVID numbers were nowhere near what they were a couple of years ago.

Indeed the migrant card can’t be played. The world world will economically suffer and the EU is no exception. I do believe we’re stronger together than apart. If the single market would be gone it would cost even more.

The debt will be defaulted.

The euro sucks, but the EEC is awesome.

So the UK, one of its largest net contributors has left. Looks like it will hurt them more than they care to admit.

Don’t forget the UK got very much subsidised by the EU as well. Cornwall, Wales, Scotland, the movie industry etc. Leaving the EU will cost them so much more than their contribution.

The north isn't subisidising the south idiot OP. Italy is a net creditor to the EU. In any case, no one is being subsidised - the single market is being supported, and the single market is what the prosperity of the northern countries depends upon, as does being part of a large union, which gives all member states more heft and strength globally - as Britain is currently finding out.

Britain does not regret leaving, r26.

Scotland sure does, Northern Ireland too. There’s some sanity left.

England doesn’t because it can’t see it’s not the 19th century anymore. You’ll find out soon enough R27

The population of Scotland is just 5 million (2 million Northern Ireland). England ( 58 million) and Wales (3 million) both supported Brexit.

The Scots aren’t English. Just because the English population is larger doesn’t mean this vote feels or is in any way fair to the countries with a smaller population. In fact it’s very oppressive if you ask me however it is democratic reality I’ll give you that.

When you look at what UE are close to be fiscal paradises that discourse goes down the shitter.

The truth is right now the UE is totally dependend of three south countries (because France no matter how they dislike it are a south country), without Italy, France and Spain there are not UE, and they are far more important than any of the other countries with the exception of Germany.

The UE failed miserably when they let countries like Poland and Hungary enter in the UE, when they are far from being healthy democracies

R31 it’s the EU.

Unless you want to refer to the United Emirates

R27, opinion polls show that the majority in Britain wish to remain in the EU.

More to the point, the country is still in the transition period and so the full effects of leaving haven't hit home yet. Just wait until after December. Given how negotiations for a trade deal with the EU are currently going, the UK will either have to exit the transition period with no trade deal with the EU (or with practically any country) - which would be an utter disaster for the UK - or basically agree a trade deal that keeps the UK tied closely to the EU. In which case, what's the point of leaving?

R32, it's the UE in Romance languages, but r31 is an idiot regardless.

R31 has a point about some Eastern European countries becoming less and less democratic whilst they are economy also not the healthiest countries.

R35, the only way to assure democracy in Poland and Hungary is for them to be in the EU. Their economies are not unhealthy. Note: the "democratic rollbacks" in the judicial system in Poland simply give it a method of selecting judges that is akin to that of the US.

R31 - Exactly what is a "healthy democracy"? The corruption in Brussels is legendary - cf. Monsanto and "Roundup" and the VW emission scandal.

Their real beef with the Visegrad Group is that they won't obey on the migrant quotas, and if you think the migrant situation is "over", you're blind.

There will be millions more on the move once the Sahel finally dries out due to climate change.

Nor have those "healthy democracies" been able to stem the tide of antisemitism rising due to those huge Muslim inflows.

Britain is well out of it. As for Scotland: it's the size of Denmark but without the prosperity. It's economy is in the toilet and the EU is not going to grandfather it in automatically.

Sturgeon has been a horrible First Minister - the country's education, health, and economy are all doing badly. 85% of its trade is with "R" UK, and stem that crap about how they aren't "English" - for many families, there are blood ties across that border.

The Indy ref lost in 2015 by a healthy margin partly because many Scots ALSO feel British. Today, I grant, COVID and the elections skewed things in the other direction, but exactly how far and whether that will hold up on polling day is debatable.

In every election there is a large swath of disappointed people. An election by its nature is adversarial. The other half always has to live with the decision - or leave.

In the event, which I still think unlikely, that Scotland left, personally I would wish them well, but I believe they would lose quite a few people streaming south of the Tweed, into England's open arms.

It really isn't a simple matter, either economically or socially.

Democracy as in not an autocracy I assume? Look at Poland it’s not looking very positive also with the woman’s rights matters.

Economically I wouldn’t call Eastern Europe prosperous(even before Corona).

As for Scotland the EU has already said they would welcome them back. I don’t understand why the English in a way so desperately seem to cling to Scotland. I don’t see why they couldn’t be fine on their own it’s not like half of Scotland is working in England. England has always tried to scare the Scots out of leaving. Apparently Scottish economy matters to England.

R38, how would ejecting Poland from the EU improve women's rights in that country? Eastern Europe is a lot wealthier and financially secure than you imagine. Some people have very distorted stereotypes about life in Eastern Europe.

In any case, the only way to stabilise the continent and secure long-term democracy and prosperity in Eastern European countries and the whole of Europe is to have them in the EU.

I didn’t mean the EU should get rid of Eastern Europe. I meant to say that the truth is there are a few wealthier countries in the EU and a lot that are not. It will always be giving and taking and I personally don’t believe we will find an economical balance anytime soon. It is what it is. It takes time and I agree the other option will in the end not work out well for any of the countries.

I’ll also admit it’s been a while since I visited Czech and Poland. I only know for certain that Romania is as corrupt as ever. I have two Romanian friends.

I think Tusk was a great EU politician that seemed to understand the dynamics in Europe very well.

[quote]the only way to stabilise the continent is to continue bribing Turkey's Erdogan with billions of Euro while turning a blind eye to his corrupt, brutal regime so that he keeps millions of invaders under his thumb.

I think Putin would be the bigger threat R41

Putin doesn't regularly threaten the EU with "opening the floodgates" to allow millions of "migrants" into Europe.

[quote]opinion polls show that the majority in Britain wish to remain in the EU.

Oh. Is that why they gay BoJo that supermajority in December? Shut up about hypotheticals.

The EU is fine. It sends its love.

[quote]Oh. Is that why they gay BoJo that supermajority in December? Shut up about hypotheticals.

The majority of the votes were against Brexit parties, R44 but you knew that. Johnson won because the press banged on and on about how awful Corbyn was. Every survey and electoral poll before and after the election had Brexit down the list of voting motivators, way behind making sure that Corbyn didn't win. Even among traditional and dyed-in-the wool Labour voters, a lot of whom switched to the very pro-EU LibDems, who had the big percentage increase of any party in the last election. Hardly surprising, since even the Labour MPs had zero confidence in him and it was the trade unions who foisted him on the PLP as leader.

That "supermajority" only came about because of an antiquated voting system that distorted votes even more than the Electoral College. It doesn't reflect anything. Parliamentary majorities have more often been landed by a minority of the votes than not.

Please remove useless backwards countries like Poland from the EU that do nothing to help.

R44, as has already been pointed out to you, the Tories got under 50% and Labour lost millions of votes because of the opposition Labour party's then truly shitty leader Jeremy Corbyn (who is a Brexiter by sympathy).

In just a few weeks, the new opposition leader - the very pro-remain Keir Starmer - is already beating Boris Johnson in polls as to who would be the best prime minister.

R44, as has already been pointed out to you, the Tories got under 50% and Labour lost millions of votes because of the opposition Labour party's then truly shitty leader Jeremy Corbyn (who is a Brexiter by sympathy).

In just a few weeks, the new opposition leader - the very pro-remain Keir Starmer - is already beating Boris Johnson in polls as to who would be the best prime minister.

If you were to rank the top 5 EU countries according to importance (yeah, yeah, all member countries are equal, blah, blah blah), few would dispute the following order:

1. Germany

2. France

3. Italy

4. Spain

5. Your pick of the Netherlands, Belgium, Sweden, Denmark or Austria (the so-called "frugal North).

As you can see, with the UK gone, there would be no EU without the south.

Nice list though economically not in the right order 🙄

Boris thread

I'll have whatever R50 is drinking.

^ r53 is from Luxembourg with a deluded sense of their importance. The EU needs Spain more than your frugal asses, bro.

R54 -Do put up your receipts on where I'm from.

PIGS: EU shorthand for Portugal, Italy, Greece, Spain.

R54, r53 is hardly likely to be from anywhere in the EU.

Brexit was funded with the help of American billionaires. We wanted to get Britain under our wing and the billionaires in Britain wanted to be able to rook the people and government out of money the way the wealthy elite are doing here. The billionaires don't give a fuck about countries. Countries can go to hell as far as they are concerned. They just want to suck up all the wealth out of every corner of the planet.

So now Britain will be suck with whatever shitty deal we set with them and make them buy our GMO foods and bleach soaked chicken among other horrible things.

People forget that the EU "net contributors" are calculated in two ways: the total sum AND the per capita contribution adjusted for population.

By per capita contribution of population, The Netherlands knocks Germany out of first place in terms of net contributions.

Check back with us when the Deutsche Bank fails.

[quote]By per capita contribution of population, The Netherlands knocks Germany out of first place in terms of net contributions.

But still tiny compared to the Germans, so no one pretends the Dutch PM has any kind of say over the EU like Frau Merkel and Macron.

Mainstream papers are contemplating its failure as well.

Lufthansa is up to Germany.

COVID proved the EU can’t function in a crisis.

R63

Centralized bureaucracies rarely function well in a situation that is not explicitly laid out with hundreds of pages of footnotes.

These people are bureaucrats, not rocket surgeons.

Now that one racist shithole has Brexited out, the EU will be more cohesive than ever. Also with the other shithole abandoning NATO, all the more reason to stick together. It's the eastern Euro countries that pose more of an issue as they still have Soviet era values. Let's give them one more generation.

R63, the EU has managed far better during the Covid crisis than the US has and better than the UK until the UK started copying EU countries.

It should also be noted that the EU as an institution has no actual remit over health care, which is a national responsibility. People who say "the EU didn't respond well during the Covid-19 crisis" are basically saying the EU should be given more responsibilities.

I don’t see how the UK did well or better than the EU countries. They responded too late unlike most of Western Europe, the number of infections rose more rapidly there as a result.

R61, mainstream papers aren't contemplating the EU's failure and the Guardian is not an EU paper. If you read beyond the generic headline you'd notice that that article is about wanting the EU to follow a more green agenda to get support from young people - and saving the environment can only happen on a supranational level, not simply a national one.

The authors of that article are also graduate students at Oxford, which is not in the EU. Judt is American, Wyss is Swiss and only Zimmermann is an EU citizen.

[quote]The future of Europe depends on climate action. This is the resounding message that young Europeans have delivered to their leaders over the past two years. To be sure, the wave of young climate activists across the continent, from Fridays for Future to Extinction Rebellion, is part of a global response to the climate crisis. But for the EU in particular, it is also a warning from a new generation of Europeans to their leaders: our European identity hinges on your climate policies.

Anti-EUers should contemplate that the Disunited Kingdom is what's more likely to fall apart.

R60, every country has a say in the EU and in areas where there is a veto every country is equal and just as important. The Netherlands and the other small countries supporting it actually managed to shape the recovery and resilience fund in very significant ways. Moreover, a large country on its own or even a group of large countries still do not have enough votes to push a policy through. the Franco-German plan for the fund went through many revisions in response to the positions of "smaller" countries. The EU isn't about one country or one group of countries getting their way over others, it's about debate and finding consensus.

[quote]Now that one racist shithole has Brexited out, the EU will be more cohesive than ever.

Ask a black person if they'd be more comfortable living in the UK or any other EU country.

[quote]...and the Blue States do not subsidize the red states.

Absolute bullshit.

R70 I did and he has settled on Sweden.

R70, Britain has black people because it colonised half the world. The areas with the largest black populations in the UK tended to vote to remain in the EU in the referendum on membership, the most white areas of the country tended to vote to leave the EU.

The three places the migrants most want to go are the UK, Germany, and Sweden. That's where the best bennies are. France's economy is stalled, and English remains the international set's, for lack of a better phrase, "lingua franca".

If anything, the EU's failures on the 2015 migration crisis and its recent farcical budget tells Britons they did absolutely the right thing getting out when they did.

If it wasn't for migrants and immigration, Brexit probably never would've happened. It's just too, too much.

R65

That is the most tortured and ignorant justification for the European Union I’ve ever seen.

R68

When the money runs out, and the ECB is printing trillions of dollars like the United States federal reserve, the bank of Japan, the Swiss national bank, and the people bank of China...it eventually fails.

The hyper inflation of Germany during the Weimar Republic is a good start. The multiple hyperinflations in Zimbabwe are more accurate.

The dollar is made up of promises by the United States government. Do you trust the United States government? Do you think other countries trust the United States government?

If the answer is no, then the dollar is going to be worthless soon.

R74 migrants are the problem sure....tell yourself that and watch the divided kingdom go to shit the next few years. I am sorry though that this is the way things are going. An EU deal not working out so far.

No one's talking about migrants anymore because in it turned out to be nothing but a scapegoat. The migrants don't even want to come here now.

R79 - Really? I guess you missed the bits about the rubber dinghies and small boats that keep arriving on the Kentish coast filled with people literally willing to risk death to get here. Another boatload of 94 arrived just a few days ago. Two-thirds of them tested positive for COVID. Greek migrant camps are filled to bursting, Erdoghan's got millions cooped up in camps in Turke, and then there's Libya, where wretched camps are also filled to bursting after the EU warned Libya to be a bit more careful about working with the people smugglers or all that nice foreign aid would disappear.

If it isn't anything but a scapegoat, why is the EU taking it up again in September - I suggest you try looking up Brussels' comment, as the bailout budget was thrashed out, of how it cannot risk another migrant failure like that of 2015. That's why they tabled it for September - they didn't want it derailing the bailout budget talks.

You may fucking hate Britain - but then, you're not living in a migrant shanty camp in France, still refusing to file for asylum because you don't like the French, already speak some English, or someone from Somalia or one of the other shitholes that, whatever the West's flaws, nake places like Britain look golden by comparison.

They're not flooding in because they're being prevented more effectively, But they're still coming and they still want to come.

A couple of thousand have landed on Britain's shores just in the last couple of years. Only a fraction have been deported.

R71 - "...and the Blue States do not subsidize the red states."

Absolute bullshit is right.

If you're referring to the EU, what is about the difference between net contributors and net creditors don't you understand?

If you're referring to America, try some research.

"AP FACT CHECK: Blue high-tax states fund red low-tax states By STEPHEN OHLEMACHER December 9, 2017 In this Dec. 5, 2017, photo, House Speaker Paul Ryan of Wis., speaks on Capitol Hill in Washington. Republican leaders have spent months promoting the myth that red low-tax states are subsidizing blue high-tax states because of the deduction for state and local taxes.

WASHINGTON (AP) — Republican leaders have spent months promoting the myth that red low-tax states are subsidizing blue high-tax states because of the deduction for state and local taxes.

An Associated Press Fact Check finds it’s actually the other way around. High-tax, traditionally Democratic states (blue), subsidize low-tax, traditionally Republican states (red) — in a big way.

Republicans are trying to eliminate the deduction as part of the sweeping tax package working its way through Congress. They added back a deduction for up to $10,000 in property taxes, in a concession to Republicans from high-tax states such as New York and New Jersey. California Republicans are pushing to extend the deduction to local income taxes, too.

It is true that taxpayers in high-tax states benefit the most from the deduction. However, these states send far more tax dollars to Washington than residents in low-tax states.

In fact, most high-tax states send more money to Washington than they get back in federal spending. Most low-tax states make a profit from the federal government’s system of taxing and spending.

THE FACTS:

Connecticut residents paid an average of $15,643 per person in federal taxes in 2015, according to a report by the Rockefeller Institute of Government. Massachusetts paid $13,582 per person, New Jersey paid $13,137 and New York paid $12,820.

California residents paid an average of $10,510.

At the other end, Mississippi residents paid an average of $5,740 per person, while West Virginia paid $6,349, Kentucky paid $6,626 and South Carolina paid $6,665.

Low-tax red states also fare better when you take into account federal spending.

Mississippi received $2.13 for every tax dollar the state sent to Washington in 2015, according to the Rockefeller study. West Virginia received $2.07, Kentucky got $1.90 and South Carolina got $1.71.

Meanwhile, New Jersey received 74 cents in federal spending for tax every dollar the state sent to Washington. New York received 81 cents, Connecticut received 82 cents and Massachusetts received 83 cents.

California fared a bit better than other blue states. It received 96 cents for every dollar the state sent to Washington.

On average, states received $1.14 in federal spending for every tax dollar they sent to Washington. That’s why the federal government has a budget deficit."

R80 where are you getting this fantasy news? YouTube?

R80 prevented by whom? your sources? I don’t hate the UK at all. In fact I really love Scotland and can’t wait to return. I don’t understand why you would believe Erdogans claims. He just wants money from the EU and is an extreme Islamist and dictator. Turkey has been pissed off ever since the negotiations to join the EU were broken off.

Also refugees since 015 are not the cause of any economic decline, the right wing populist governments are.

Thousands of illegal immigrants are not arriving on British shores in dinghies. That’s just nonsense. It would be front page news if that were happening. It’s not.

[quote]No one's talking about migrants anymore because they'll end up in jail if they do.

[quote]Thousands of illegal immigrants are not arriving on British shores in dinghies.

10s of thousands of illegals continue to arrive on the shores of Italy, Spain, Greece and Malta. They will be moved on to EU countries that have the means to support them.

R77: Here's the inflation troll to tell all of us who are not rich to starve to death because WIEMAR or some stupid shit. Fuck off, troll.

R85 - I don't know what planet you think the rest of us are living in, but the "migrant resettlement" programme the EU tried to force down the throats of the bloc was a dismal failure and ended up dead in the water both politically and practically.

No one wants them. Out of the 160,000 initially cleared for resettlement, only 60,000 were resettled. Even Sweden was forced to close its doors and say No More or risk the Sweden Democrats getting further up the political food chain.

More than two thousand illegal migrants have arrived on the shores of Britain in the last two years. Look it the fuck up.

"More migrants have crossed the Channel illegally this year than the whole of 2019, as a record 166 arrive on nine boats.

So far this year, 1,929 migrants have reached the UK in this way, compared to 1,890 for the whole of 2019"

That was as of June 2020.

You were saying?

R87 I put far more credence in the UNHCR.

"In recent years, the United States has been the world’s top resettlement country, with Canada, Germany, the United Kingdom, Australia and the Nordic countries also providing a sizeable number of places annually." - UNHCR Resettlement Report

"Since the Ggovernment announced the expansion of the scheme on 7th September 2015, including the target of resettling an additional 20,000 refugees under the scheme by 2020, 19,768 refugees have been resettled in the UK. In the year ending March 2020, a further 416 people were resettled under the Vulnerable Children Resettlement Scheme (VCRS). Of those resettled under the VPRS and VCRS in this year, 168 refugees were resettled under the Community Sponsorship scheme.

From 2020, once the 20,000 VPRS refugees have been resettled, the UK has announced plans to resettle around 5,000 of the world’s most vulnerable refugees in the first year of operation of a  new resettlement scheme. This new scheme will consolidate VPRS, VCRS and the Gateway Protection Programme into one global scheme.

In the year ending March 2020, 7,482  Family reunion visas were issued to partners and children of those granted asylum or humanitarian protection in the UK (up 37%).

- UNHCR Asylum in the UK

r85 Roughly 10,000 migrants each for Italy, Spain and Greece since January of 2020 is a tiny, tiny fraction of what it was during the crisis of 2015. Even a small country like Malta could handle those numbers. Look at the graph of land and sea arrivals from 2015. Surely you don't suppose every single migrant that lands in the EU makes a beeline for the English channel, do you? It's no longer a "crisis" but a manageable issue.

Now if you want to talk about what triggered the refugee crisis of 2015, I'll happily abide. Start with France and the UK participating in the illegal overthrow of Libya's Gaddafi as well as arming the rebels in Syria, for what? Assad has tightened his grip on power.

Migrants are not a negative influence on our economies. It’s jealousy and fear you’re feeling R85

[quote]Surely you don't suppose every single migrant that lands in the EU makes a beeline for the English channel, do you?

Surely you aren't naive enough to believe that "migrants" who are well aware of the freebies handed out by Britain, Germany, etc. are going to happily remain in poor, cheap-assed countries like Italy, Spain, Greece and Malta, especially in light of the social and political nightmare hundreds of thousands of "migrants" are causing in largely homogenous societies.

The "refugee crisis" of 2015 was triggered by EU countries indifference to protecting their borders against invaders exacerbated by Merkel's woefully misguided "Jeder willkommen" policy, which sank the EU into the current quagmire with Turkey now firmly holding the EU by the balls.

[quote]Migrants are not a negative influence on our economies.

I wonder if taxpayers and those dependent on social welfare would agree your assessment.

[quote]Migrants are not a negative influence on our economies. It’s jealousy and fear you’re feeling

Bullshit. They're also a negative influence on the culture and quality of life of the host country. Nobody in a civilized first world country where everybody has equal rights wants these backass Medieval turds.

Yes, let's ignore that that flood was reduced to a trickle with Merkel unilaterally and frantically, as she saw her political career going up in flames, bribing Erdoghan with billions from EU taxpayers to keep them penned in in Turkey, thus putting the crafty old dictator's hands around the bloc's throat by threatening them with "opening the floodgates" and sending them in Europe's direction every time Brussels criticises him.

The camps off Greece and Italy are crammed to the gills. The migrants rip up their papers so that it takes months to find out what country they're really from, and when the country is identified, it fails to cooperate because those countries are glad to offload extra population into Europe. As this destabilises European political landscape, as alarmed natives start reacting, it also pleases Russia and China.

The people we were resettled were a drop in the bucket, and Merkel's resettlement plan via QMV (in other words, quantitative majority voting, rather than total consensus) was admitted a failure after three years.

More migrants have been intercepted on the Kentish coast so far this year than in all of last year. That's a fact.

The UNHCR has a blatant agenda: open borders in Europe and no thought for the impact on culture and demographics in Europe whatsoever. They are wholly and only interested in the migrants.

Sweden slammed its doors shut for a very good reason. Denmark has enacted the harshest naturalisation, assimilation, and asylum benefits in Europe in an attempt, mostly successful, to send the migrants to Germany or Sweden or the UK.

With Africa set to produce three billion of the four billion people projected to be added to the planet's population burden, JUST as climate change dries out sub-Saharan Africa and makes it uninhabitable and Africa even less able to feed itself, tens of millions will be on the move within 30 years.

Europe can see it coming down the pike. They'll make a few nice gestures, a few thousand here or there, but almost the entire bloc doesn't want it. The Visegrad Group dug its heels in and simply refused to take any. That's aside from the migrants' mulish insistence on country shopping.

And the EU. STILL hasn't sent Italy the help it's been begging for with the floods of migrants that washed over its shores in 2015-2016 when Angela Merkel so rashly made it look so easy. Italy's resentment and anger at the EU are rock bottom. Border areas and southern Italy are now riddled with crime gangs making fortunes off forged passports and ID cards so migrants can move around and head off to wealthier countries with better benefits and economies.

The EU failed miserably in 2015. It knows it, it has stated it, and it knows it has to find a way to enforce its borders better, deport more migrants, and persuade some willing countries to take some amount without again making Europe look like an open door.

And Merkel, by the way, did not consult a single other EU member, or Brussels HQ herself, when she opened those floodgates, knowing full well that countries besides Germany would be impacted sooner or later. In fact, she didn't consult her own government, which was illegal.

Her "Wie Schaffen Dis!" bullshit was gone in months.

Forgot about the Cologne Train Station assaults on NYE 2016, already, have we? The Paris attacks? The Brussels Airport attacks? The crime rate rises that Sweden tried to cover up by refusing to list the ethnicity of sexual predators when identified (an interviewee on a BBC programme on the state of things in Sweden admitted the government hadn't really prepared for people whose view of women and sex were not aligned with that of northern Europe).

Countries will be bribed or strong-armed to take some. But the number of those taken is small compared to the invisible number in Turkish, Greek, Italian, and Libyan camps who want to get here.

^ We have a wingnut, ladies and gentlemen.

R93 is fucking deranged.

R95 Sorry that the truth is inconvenient.

Fucking fools, those refugees are not staying in Turkey. They are in Greece, Italy maybe more countries around the Mediterranean. Why the fuck do any of you right wing basterds believe anything Erdoghan says? He’s an extreme Muslim and an autocrat. Yes surely he had and has the best intentions for the UK. Dream on.

R93 I’m so happy for you that you are out of the EU. Enjoy the demise. Don’t come crying.

Its Scotland's own fault they're leaving the EU, they had the chance to vote for independence but choose to stay in the UK because of all the money they get from English taxpayers. They voted to remain part of the Union for good and ill and shouldn't moan about Brexit because they did this to themselves.

R96 - LOL. How convenient their memories are, eh? The Cologne train station, the Paris attacks, the Brussels airport attacks, the rising sex crimes in Sweden, Sweden shutting its doors, Denmark taking a hard line, Merkel's deal with a fascist dictator in Turkey, giving him leverage over the EU, the EU failing to help Italy with its migrant floods, the camps in Greece, Turkey, Libya . . .

I made them all up. They never happened. They have no bearing on the political trends that occurred as a result in the EU . . . why, none! If you google them, you'll find nothing.

R100 Nice try but a bunch of crap. Italy, Greece etc. They were all paid for the refugees by the EU. Erdogan can never be trusted at any rate. How is he having any leverage? He never ever held the refugees in Turkey. Old news.

I an drafting a plan for The Mighty Netherlands to take over the entire northern part (sorry, France). We will call it the Kroketten-Blitz. Three years from now, Dutch will be the language of Groot Neerlandia.

Funny, the Dutch were really desperate for the UK to remain. And in Denmark, I remember a group of demonstrators blasting 'Please Don't Go' the whole night of the referendum.

What do Brits think of David Cameron, I wonder?

You have my support R102. It would make things a lot easier in Europe 😉

R103 of course we were sad to see them go, they’re our neighbours and there’s a lot of history(not all positive). Currently most of us don’t understand how the Brits can be so stupid. They are not doing themselves a favour and are drawing the shortest straw, harming the EU in the process.

Nice try? Turkey "paying" for refugees"? Turkey is being paid to HOLD refugees to the tune of 3bn euros.

"On the night of 27-28 February, Turkey lifted the strict controls it has enforced at its sea and land borders with Greece since March 2016, prompting thousands of migrants to head for the frontier in order to attempt passage into Europe. Ankara’s decision came just an hour after news broke that at least 34 Turkish soldiers had been killed in Idlib, Syria’s last rebel-held bastion. It was the highest death toll the Turkish military had suffered in a single attack in the last two decades, and it exacerbated fears that intensified combat in Idlib would push nearly one million more Syrians into Turkey to join the four million refugees the country has been generously hosting.

Ankara’s move was popular among Turkish citizens, who are growing weary of the socio-economic burdens of hosting refugees and want them to return to Syria, as Turkish officials have been promising for some time that they will. With social services badly overstretched, anti-migrant sentiment is on the rise – at times erupting into violent clashes in cities densely populated by refugees. Turkish politicians are likewise worried about the drain on the country’s resources as well as the domestic blowback should there be a new inflow of refugees from Idlib, which is home to some three million civilians. Hundreds of thousands have already fled toward the Turkish border, many marooned in precarious conditions in makeshift camps.

Some observers say the government removed the border restrictions to deflect public attention from the military’s losses in Idlib, where it has reportedly deployed some 20,000 soldiers in an effort to contain the fighting. For two days after the attack, Ankara blocked Internet users’ access to Twitter, Facebook, Instagram and YouTube, all widely used social media platforms in the country. . .

While the Turkish government needed a public relations victory, it had deeper motives in opening the borders. Ankara calculated that the move would pressure the European Union into supporting its course in Idlib and secure additional funding for the Syrian refugees in Turkey. It also aimed to compel the EU to meet its commitments under a March 2016 agreement by which Turkey limits the number of migrants crossing into Europe in exchange for refugee aid and other promises.

The 2016 migration deal had been hanging by a thread long before President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan made good on his longstanding threat to open the borders. Turkish officials had been vocal in their dissatisfaction with the EU’s failure to deliver on three of the deal’s provisions: visa liberalisation, a customs union upgrade and accelerated negotiations over Turkish accession to the EU. They have also been demanding more backing for Ankara’s venture in Idlib, including air cover to establish a “safe zone”, and more humanitarian aid for displaced civilians in Syria, as well as more financial assistance for Syrian refugees in Turkey.

. . . Ankara’s tactic appears to have prodded an EU fearful of a repeat of the 2015-2016 migration crisis into action."

This is from "Sharing the Burden: Revisitng the EU-Turkey Migration Deal", on the website of Crisis Group (nonprofit) International, dated 13 March 2020.

Any more "nice trys" at pretending the EU is going to amiably share out migrants that it will be welcoming with open arms amongst "willing countries" (how many would that be, I wonder?) and how Turkey isn't holding anything or that Merkel didn't put Erdoghan's hands around the EU's neck in a frantic effort to save her political career and stop the far right from making inroads (she failed at both)?

A Northern European union could make sense - the northerners are significantly more aligned fiscally, for a start. I can imagine that even the U.K. would like to be a part of that. It'll never happen, though, Brexit has been such a shitstorm that it'll put any potential dissenters off for decades.

Again, it should be noted that Merkel did an end run around the EU who had already begun hammering out a deal with Erdoghan, and hammered out her own, unilaterally. Ms I'm Saving Democracy For Europe acted imperiously, high-handedly, and unilaterally and then tried forced her deal down an appalled but hog-tied and craven EU's throat.

Visa liberalisaion, loosened trading regs for Turkey, and acceleration of Turkey's entry into the EU were never "promises". Even Merkel couldn't get that done on her own and both she and Erdoghan knew that. Turkey joining the EU and visa liberalisation for Turks were one of the levers that pushed BREXIT along - there is deep opposition to both not only in the UK but the EU.

Britain was the EU's second biggest net contributor. So far, neither the eurozone nor the EU are doing so spectacularly well that the UK has anything to regret. They have massive issues of debt, border enforcement, that Hail Mary deal with Turkey, and continuing migrations issues to deal with and there are angry divisions in the bloc.

The EU is not nirvana. Neither is Britain, which has survived as a successful nation for centuries before the EU came along.

As for NATO - I'm sure American citizens would love to see it dismantled. Germany, too. Then it can cough up for its own military - oh, wait! The Left is going to abolish all militaries in Europe, right?

I can see Putin smiling from ear to ear.

[quote]So far, neither the eurozone nor the EU are doing so spectacularly well that the UK has anything to regret.

This part, I'm sad to admit, is true and will remain so for the foreseeable future. The EU, without the UK, is like a one-armed soldier: diminished agility, reach and power in addition to being more vulnerable shocks. The same goes for the UK though. Unless the US becomes as invested in its prosperity as they are in Israel's.

R108 Marry me.

R110 - Baisers, mon ami, but I am spoken for.

Polish minister says that the entire country should be an LGBT-free zone. This is what the EU has become. I say Britain did well to get out.

Is there any mechanism for the other members of the EU to castigate or take measures against other EU members who act like Poland is acting now? I mean, they are breaking the standards the EU was founded on, right? Did they not put in any enforcement measures when it was formed? Is Angela Merkel at least going to go kick the Polish president's ass?

R113

Your post perfectly sums up the thesis behind this thread.

Kudos.

The EU has become a cumbersome bureaucracy that will not survive the current depression.

I don’t think DC will survive this, either.

Holding homophobic proto-fascists accountable isn't bureaucracy. Poland should be sanctioned on the world stage but, at the very least, by the union they voluntarily joined.

R113 - The EU is a trading bloc, not a country, much as it likes to pretend it is one. It's really neither fish nor fowl.

Other single members of the bloc have no jurisdiction to "punish" another member of the bloc unilaterally. The EU itself can impose fines and issues periodic threats against members who don't behave according to the bloc's "constitution", but those are hard to enforce and after the UK made good on its threat to take its contributions and fisheries and defence force home (in the entire bloc, only France and Britain have anything resembling a real defence force - Germany's is a joke), the EU is cautious about feeding more anti-EU feeling.

Sentiments have changed in the bloc since the 2015 migrant crisis that Merkel and the EU handled so badly.

And the EU itself has blotted its "democracy" copybook more than once - I'm amazed at how quickly the VW emissions scandal died after it emerged that Brussels new the emissions reports were false. Then there was the EU allowing chemicals giant Monsanto to release Roundup back on the EU market after pressure by the company, despite hundreds of scientists signing a report of its danger as a carcinogen (it's used freely in American, by the way).

The EU also has a track record of pressuring members to keep holding referendums until they get the result they want when the first one doesn't.

The Visegrad Group may not be quite the EU's cup of tea on the face of it, but as it happens Poland, Hungary, and the Czech Republic are doing reasonably well financially.

E.g., Hungary is listed as a high-income mixed economy, ranked as the 10th most complex economy according to the Economic Complexity Index with a heavily export-oriented market doing a lot of foreign trade. In fact, the country is the 35th largest export economy in the world.

Poland's economy is also growing rapidly and in fact ranks well ahead of Hungary. It's classified as High Income by the World Bank, and 21st in the Economic Complexity Index.

So whilst the EU waggles fingers and threatens and chastises, it really has to be careful about how punitive it gets. Germany's and France's economies are stalled. Italy's economy is in the toilet.

In the end, as the old saying has it, People Walk but Money Talks.

^*Brussels knew (not new) the emissions report were false.

R116 the migrant crisis again? Migrants are not the problem right now. The UK can’t simply take its “fisheries” because there is no deal about the North Sea with the EU and it looks like it will not be resolved in the near future. Even though the UK is a net contributor like several other countries, the single market made up for that by far(apart from the subsidies the UK received).

The biggest part of Eastern Europe is doing better than Italy, Spain or Greece for sure.

I’m happy for you that you feel so confident about the UK’s future though. I wouldn’t feel the same way if I lived there.

[quote]Polish minister says that the entire country should be an LGBT-free zone.

If he doesn't want Leprechauns, Goblins, Brownies and Trolls in his country, I can't say I blame him.

R116 The EU has basically turned into the Comintern/Warsaw Pact. Only worse. While the Eastern European countries still have people who lived under communism, they may be safe, but eventually democracy is going to be extinguished from Europe altogether.

The EU is already limping along. No one’s betting on them long term.

The EU will survive all of us.

Not saying this because I’m so pro European but this has been a development that started after WW2 and it’s not going to stop any time soon. Most EU countries are fine with being in the EU even if they don’t agree with all its policies.

[quote]Most EU countries are being destroyed by EU policies but are too politically and financially invested to question or dissent.

In the end it’s all about money, if it’s economically not beneficial anymore that’s when it will end.

In the end it’s all about money, if it’s economically not beneficial anymore that’s when it will end.

There are some excellent posts here, including R93, R108, and R116. However, it never ceases to amaze me that there are still people in 2020 who can talk so much about a subject that they know so little of. When you get all of your news from only one source or two, you're bound to be out of touch after awhile.

To really crystallize what many people have been saying here, I'll quote Marco Gervasoni, Italian professor of Contemporary History at the University of Molise who co-wrote “Coronavirus. The End of Globalisation” with Corrado Ocone:

"This crisis showed that the omnipotence of the economy was something ideological: for years we have been told that national governments can no longer make decisions, that finances decide everything and that resources were lacking. Then we saw that national governments can nationalise, that there is money for financing hospitals. The idea is for the supreme authority to move from finance back to politics. These are interesting, but difficult changes, because part of the European political class, some parties on both the left and the right, are linked to the world of finance. The categories of left and right will also disappear, other alliances will be formed. There will be a complete change of political paradigm that I would compare to the period after the First World War."

R126 with all due respect that you have a wide knowledge what bothers me in this thread is that people are trying to turn this into some kind of complicated situation and it really isn’t. No matter how many sources you get your info from. I understand that to the Italians with their corrupted government this article is news. To many other EU countries it surely isn’t it. We expect our national government to step in. We don’t expect the EU to solve things as we are sovereign states.

So enlighten us, what does it all boil down to according to you? Or is the Italian professor the one source you fully agree with?

Is there still the Commonwealth of Independent States with Russia and other USSR countries? Because maybe the EU Will be like that: exist, but no one hears about it or knows about it. The real power would be in its members.

As far as I know Putin simply wants his satellite states back and does what he can to highlight as many divisive factors within the EU as he can. Divide and conquer.

Putin doesn't care about satellite states, he is perfectly happy to let the USA pay for defending them as long as he can rake in money from them.

R114 both of those developments would be welcome, and the only hope for the salvation of western civilization.

R131

If that post can get 4 W&W on liberal bastion Datalounge...the sclerotic, cumbersome, expensive bureaucracies are already dead.

We will decentralize because of the failure of “command economy” regulatory bullshit and worldwide insanity in monetary policy. There is no other way forward.

R66 Didnt Einstien say he couldn't work out his own taxes, designed by beaurocrats.

Roman Empire, Holy Roman Empire, Persian empire, Hanseatic League, ottoman Empire ...all lasted hundreds of years before dispersement. No reason why the EU can’t get its shit together and last for several hundred years.

But Russia will never be included.

R134

The organizations you mention were organic and hierarchically flat.

The European Union is a bloated, incompetent, dysfunctional bureaucracy that is destroying Europe. It will not survive the decade.

[quote]The EU will ultimately fail.

And the Sphinx will ultimately fall below the sand.

I never thought the EU's had a chance