One of the arguments most regularly used by those who want to keep us under the influence of Brussels is that being in the European Union is key to our economic wellbeing. We have heard it from the Governor of the Bank of England to the CBI and the Treasury. Logically, if it is the EU that is the key element in our economic success, then that same benefit must be replicated across other member states. The facts, however, paint a very different picture from the rhetoric of the Remain campaign.

Of the countries in the OECD, 16 of the 20 with the highest unemployment  rates are in the European Union. Of the 10 OECD countries with the highest unemployment, only one is not in in the European Union. Unemployment averages 6.5 per cent in the OECD; 8.9 per cent in the EU; and 10.3 per cent in the Eurozone. Britain’s unemployment is just over 5 per cent. If the EU is so good and so key for economic wellbeing, why is it failing almost every other country in the EU?. One of the reasons is the failure of the euro – the most sacred and central element of the European Project.

The euro was always a flawed venture.

It is a centralising political project masquerading as an economic one, and since its inception rules have been regularly ignored, creating new cracks in its already inherently flawed architecture. Such was the rush to join that no exit mechanism was devised, with the consequence that no one has any idea how to get out in a crisis.

There were two intellectually defensible models for the euro. The first was to be honest and say that it was such an important element of Ever Closer Union that everything possible had to be done to make it succeed. Some saw this as analogous to the American experience after the civil war. With the abolition of the Confederate currency, a hugely difficult operation, the states’ debts were consolidated into the federal debt for the first time and free fiscal transfers were enabled between the federal and state governments if required. This process proved impossible in Europe because of the huge disparity between countries’ debt levels and the unwillingness of sovereign states to bail out other sovereign states.

The second model was a purely economic one. Currency union was to be available to those economically similar nations which could meet strict criteria for entry and maintain sufficient fiscal discipline to be allowed a say in the central bank.

In the end neither model was followed; instead an unstable and unworkable hybrid emerged. Not only were countries who failed to meet the convergence criteria allowed to join anyway, but a lack of fiscal discipline subsequently meant that many countries, including at times France and Germany, broke through the barriers that were supposed to keep the currency on the rails.

Little wonder that some states operated in the apparent belief that whatever they did a financial solution would be found for them from outside. Yet, ironically, when bailouts have become necessary, largely funded by German taxpayers, Berlin’s stance has been interpreted in some quarters to mean that Germany is willing to tolerate any level of austerity in any other country apart from Germany in order to make the project succeed. The resultant resentment is a recipe for instability and the revival of nationalism in Europe. The idea of austerity being forced upon smaller nations by Berlin has too much historical resonance to succeed without fostering potentially dangerous political backlashes on both left and right.

On top of the political dangers, the human costs are immense. Across the Continent, millions of young Europeans have been deprived of economic opportunity and hope. High, long-term youth unemployment is the price the bureaucrats in Brussels have been all too willing to pay for their precious single currency.

A generation has been readily sacrificed on the altar of the euro – and for what? The answer is the vanity and pride of those who will stop at nothing to achieve their vision of a European state. What’s worse we pay for its failure through our budgetary contribution. The more our economy grows in relation to the disastrous Eurozone, the more our contribution goes up. The EU is not a key element of our economic success but a threat on our doorstep.

tel: 44 (0)1594 – 528 337
Calls from ‘Number Withheld’ phones Are Blocked

All unanswered messages are recorded.
Leave your name & a UK land line number & I will return your call.

‘e’Mail Address: Greg_L-W@BTconnect.com

Accuracy & Copyright Statement: CLICK HERE

~~~~~~~~~~#########~~~~~~~~~~

With an avg. 1.2M voters per MEP & Britain having only 8%, if united, say. The EUropean Parliament has no ability to make policy and has a Commission of unelected bureaucrats, thus clearly the EU is not even a pretence of being a democracy; yet The EU & many of its vassal States are willing to slaughter people in Sovereign States to impose The EU’s chosen brand of democracy on them!

The imposition of a Government and policies upon its vassal regions such as the peoples of Greece shows just how far from being a democracy the EU is.

There will be little or no change in Britain’s economic position, when we leave the EU, using a better negotiated & updated version of the ‘Norway Model’ as a stepping stone to becoming a full member of the Eropean Economic Area, where all will benefit, as we secure trade relations with the EU’s vassal regions, with an EFTA style status and can trade and negotiate independently on the global stage, as members of The Commonwealth and the Anglosphere.

One huge benefit will be that we can negotiate with bodies like the WTO, UN, WHO, IMF, CODEX and the like, directly in our own interest and that of our partners around the world in both the Commonwealth and the Anglosphere at large; rather than having negotiations and term imposed by unelected EU bureacrats and their ionterpretation of the rules handed down as if they were some great achievement by the EU.

The greatest change and benefit will be political, as we improve our democracy and self determination, with the ability to deselect and elect our own Government, with an improved Westminster structure, see >Harrogate Agenda<.

How we go about the process of disentangling our future wellbeing from the EU is laid out in extensive, well researched and immensely tedious detail see >FleXcit< or for a brief video summary CLICK HERE

• I NEVER post anonymously on the internet
• ALL MY BLOGS & WEB SITES are clearly sourced to me
• I do NOT use an obfuscated eMail address to hide behind
• I do NOT use or bother reading FaceBook
• I DO have a Voice Mail Message System
• I ONLY GUARANTEE to answer identifiable eMails
• I ONLY GUARANTEE to phone back identifiable UK Land Line Messages
• I do NOT accept phone calls from witheld numbers
• I Regret due to BT in this area I have a rubbish Broadband connection
• I AM opposed to British membership of The EU
• I AM opposed to Welsh, Scottish or English Independence within an interdependent UK
• I am NOT a WARMIST
• I do NOT believe the IPCC Climate Propaganda re Anthropogenic Global Warming
• I AM strongly opposed to the subsidy or use of failed technologies eg. WIND TURBINES
• I AM IN FAVOUR of rapid research & development of NEW NUCLEAR technologies
• I see no evidence to trust POLITICIANS at any level or of any persuasion
• I do NOT believe in GODS singular or plural, Bronze Age or Modern
• I value the NHS as a HEALTH SERVICE NOT a Lifestyle support
• I believe in a DEATH PENALTY for serial or GBH rape.
• I believe in a DEATH PENALTY for serial, terrorist, mass or for pleasure murder.
• I believe in a DEATH PENALTY for serial gross child abuse including sexual.
• I do NOT trust or believe in armed police
• I believe in EUTHENASIA under clearly defined & legal terms

Please Be Sure To
..

Re-TWEET my Twitterings