Brexit

[Yugguy]

They would have made no difference. The EUs end goal is federation.

 

[dry run]

It would be expecting too much of Farage and Friends to ever do anything which might help the EU. The fact Farage and friends were even there was counter productive to the UK ever getting any reform as his stated aim was to get the UK out.

In that case, Farage was more successful than you give him credit for

 

[gizze]

It would be expecting too much of Farage and Friends to ever do anything which might help the EU. The fact Farage and friends were even there was counter productive to the UK ever getting any reform as his stated aim was to get the UK out.

One of the only politicians you can say truly achieved his goal.

 

[LostKiwi]

Here you go:

http://www.vox.com/2015/6/30/8867939/greece-economic-crisis


http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/europpblog/2...en-scapegoating-greeks-and-love-bombing-them/




https://www.theguardian.com/business/economics-blog/2012/may/18/who-blame-greece-crisis

https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/greece/2015-08-10/greece-blame-crisis (bits of this are behind a paywall)


http://www.cnbc.com/2015/04/21/whos-really-to-blame-for-the-greek-crisis.html

http://www.vox.com/2015/7/6/8900659/greek-crisis-blame

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...e-about-whos-to-blame/?utm_term=.cc7985445813

http://euronomist.blogspot.co.uk/2012/11/whos-fault-is-it-for-crisis.html

https://www.forbes.com/sites/stevekeen/2015/01/21/its-all-the-greeks-fault/3/#7d68a3287121

https://www.forbes.com/sites/stevek...gedy-german-farce-german-myth/2/#4c91b90231d6

Ok so looked at a couple of those links but the ones looked at deal with Greece AFTER joining the EU.

The point I was making all along was that the Greeks put themselves in this position BEFORE joining the EU.

So... they joined the EU by fudging the books and employed Goldman Sachs to hide it. I'm not an accountant but logic dictates that a vast organisation like GS would not make the fudge easy to find unless you were specifically looking for it.
So to state the obvious yet again, the Greek government chose this path. They chose to fudge the books. They chose to give up control over their currency. They chose to join the EU with all that entailed. There were no stormtroopers massed on the border demanding they joined or the EU would invade. It was a conscious willing decision made by the Greeks to seek to apply for membership of the EU.
In the Vox video clip the Greek government then chose (after granting of membership and the wheres and wherefores of that are essentially irrelevant at this point) to borrow a lot of cheap money. So again the Greeks made the decision to deepen their debt and, realising they were on a sticky wicket continued to hide the true levels. During this period the Greek economy boomed on the foreign money being borrowed (Vox says so and demonstrated it in a graph). Then the banking collapse occurred, there was a change in government in Greece and the incoming government opted to come clean - something they should have done 8 years previously! The finance for Greece dried up - after all who would lend to a customer that has demonstrated they cannot be trusted to tell the truth about their finances? And by then the damage was done and the slide down the slippery slope began.

The EU may have demonstrated poor judgement in allowing Greece to join the EU but it did so at the request of the Greek government (for what were possibly strategically advantageous reasons).

So to answer your points:
1. What sort of due diligence took place? Who knows. It may not have been sufficient but it depends how well Goldman Sachs hid their activities.
2. How naïve must the EU have been? - given your arguments above, the deceit was clear to see Is it? Goldman Sachs are a large financial organisation. I have no doubt that unless you knew where to look the deceit was not obvious.
3. How on earth could we trust our economic and political future to an organisation so easily conned by some financial slight of hand by one of its members See above. In terms of whether Greece was to blame or not its irrelevant as its the impact you're discussing not the root cause. You've already got your way there anyway with Brexit. so its a moot point.
4. How many other countries have done the same thing (*ahem* Italy)? I've already mentioned JPM and Italy.
5. How much more trouble is brewing? For Greece I suspect lots. Quite likely for the rest of us too. Thanks Greece.
6. What a dogs breakfast they have made of handling it Did they have many choices? Easy to be wise after the fact. Once Greece started down the slippery slope the die was pretty much cast.
7. How did the EU's accountants miss this (oh, wait, the EU has not published its own accounts in years). We're looking at whether Greece is to blame for its current issues. Its nothing to do with the EU accounts - it was Greece's accounts were doctored. I do agree the EU should publish its accounts and not to is a big mistake but its not relevant to Greece's actions between 1999-2008 which set this whole train of history in motion.
8. How many other countries are breaking the EU's fiscal rules whilst the EU does nothing (*ahem*, France, Germany) Yes others have and will continue to do so. Funnily enough the UK sanctioned the original breach by France and Germany and broke the rules in 2005. From the FT

"What’s more, they were supported in this action by the UK (otherwise known as the country that like to lecture others on fiscal discipline). Gordon Brown was chancellor at the time."

The EU isn't perfect. Its made up of people so never will be.
But in the opinion of several of us on here its not as bad as others are making out.

Ask yourself, is our own government perfect? Will it ever be, no matter how many times we vote out the incompetent ones?

 

[Taffy7hfa]

"The EU isn't perfect. Its made up of people so never will be.
But in the opinion of several of us on here its not as bad as others are making out.

Ask yourself, is our own government perfect? Will it ever be, no matter how many times we vote out the incompetent ones? "

No, our government isn't perfect, but it's not trying to rule 27 other countries.

 

[Headhurts]

LostKiwi I love your loyalty to the EU and I can tell you truly believe that remaining would have been best for our country.

The EU will never change until there is a system to vote in and out the people who run it.

The fact they do not publish accounts worries me, have they ever?
What sort of organisation does this? The opportunity for corruption must be vast.

A large number of people who voted leave are aware that in the short term we will take a financial hit but still voted out to get some control back over our country.

Imagine if the people who voted remain came to terms with it and put their effort into working together over Brexit?

Yes I realise it's hard to put effort into something you don't believe in.

Shame though isn't it?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[LostKiwi]

"The EU isn't perfect. Its made up of people so never will be.
But in the opinion of several of us on here its not as bad as others are making out.

Ask yourself, is our own government perfect? Will it ever be, no matter how many times we vote out the incompetent ones? "

No, our government isn't perfect, but it's not trying to rule 27 other countries.

No...it's only ruling 4. That's just a matter of scale.

 

[Xtractorfan]

One of the only politicians you can say truly achieved his goal.

NO have a look at Tony B liar and any retired former MPs , most are extremely successful in other jobs, lined up when they were at the helm. They mostly all achieve their goals.

 

[Craiglxviii]

No...it's only ruling 4. That's just a matter of scale.

It used to rule a lot more than 4 though. For quite a long time...

 

[LostKiwi]

It used to rule a lot more than 4 though. For quite a long time...

That was a whole different series of Brexits....

 

[gizze]

The EU isn't perfect. Its made up of people so never will be.
But in the opinion of several of us on here its not as bad as others are making out.

Ask yourself, is our own government perfect? Will it ever be, no matter how many times we vote out the incompetent ones?

At least we can vote them out though.

 

[LostKiwi]

At least we can vote them out though.

Lords?

 

[Taffy7hfa]

It used to rule a lot more than 4 though. For quite a long time...

And that Empire disintegrated.....as they all do, eventually. The EU is just the next in a very long line.

 

[gizze]

NO have a look at Tony B liar and any retired former MPs , most are extremely successful in other jobs, lined up when they were at the helm. They mostly all achieve their goals.

Political goal.

Sure most of them are successful in many regards, especially after their political careers are over, but how many politicians have one main aim and achieve it?
Admittedly I suppose having a single goal is not even possible for many, but still.

 

[gizze]

Lords?

Haha, we'll soon see.

 

[LostKiwi]

Political goal.

Sure most of them are successful in many regards, especially after their political careers are over, but how many politicians have one main aim and achieve it?

Probably more than you think...
Stalin?
Pol Pot?
Kim Yung Un?
Chairman Mao?
Ghenghis Khan?

Or less controversial...
Lincoln? Churchill? Ghandi? Mandela? Martin Luther King?
Maybe even Thatcher and Reagan...

 

[Craiglxviii]

And that Empire disintegrated.....as they all do, eventually. The EU is just the next in a very long line.

Well, it did have a rather significant external factor applied to it (two global wars). The EU hasn't seen that. What it has seen though is a significant period of political delusion, a lot of which has only really been coming out over the last couple of years.

Not that I'm saying it would have gone on forever, it wouldn't. But without the costs of bankrolling those wars the Empire, or more likely Commonwealth would be rather more prosperous and well founded.

 

[davemercedes]

Haha, we'll soon see.

Interesting response. People have been saying "Haha we'll see" for years!

I've always thought our first/second chamber setup is a funny sort of democracy but the Lords job is supposed to be to "hold the government to account". It looks as though the government will try to bar the Lords amendments for Brexit and they probably can. But the over the years, governments of every political shade have threatened to change their terms or abolish them Wikipedia describes the last one that was abandoned due to Conservative pressure:

All three of the main parties promised to take action on Lords reform in the 2010 general election, and following it the Coalition Agreement included a promise to "establish a committee to bring forward proposals for a wholly or mainly elected upper chamber on the basis of proportional representation".[5] Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg introduced the House of Lords Reform Bill 2012 on 27 June 2012[6] which built on proposals published on 17 May 2011.[7] However, this Bill was abandoned by the Government on 6 August 2012 following opposition from within the Conservative Party. A successful attempt to pursue minor reform of the House was made on 14 May 2014 when the House of Lords Reform Act 2014 gained Royal Assent.
​

It's funnier still that the same Tory party that wanted to stop reform in 2012 is now threatening to abolish them! Hmm I wonder...

 

[triumphstag]

Interesting response. People have been saying "Haha we'll see" for years!

I've always thought our first/second chamber setup is a funny sort of democracy but the Lords job is supposed to be to "hold the government to account". It looks as though the government will try to bar the Lords amendments for Brexit and they probably can. But the over the years, governments of every political shade have threatened to change their terms or abolish them Wikipedia describes the last one that was abandoned due to Conservative pressure:

All three of the main parties promised to take action on Lords reform in the 2010 general election, and following it the Coalition Agreement included a promise to "establish a committee to bring forward proposals for a wholly or mainly elected upper chamber on the basis of proportional representation".[5] Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg introduced the House of Lords Reform Bill 2012 on 27 June 2012[6] which built on proposals published on 17 May 2011.[7] However, this Bill was abandoned by the Government on 6 August 2012 following opposition from within the Conservative Party. A successful attempt to pursue minor reform of the House was made on 14 May 2014 when the House of Lords Reform Act 2014 gained Royal Assent.
​

It's funnier still that the same Tory party that wanted to stop reform in 2012 is now threatening to abolish them! Hmm I wonder...

And here is me thinking that abolishing the unelected upper house would be right up your street Dave.

Sent from my HTC One_M8 using Tapatalk

 

[prwales]

NO have a look at Tony B liar and any retired former MPs , most are extremely successful in other jobs, lined up when they were at the helm. They mostly all achieve their goals.

it's deferred pay in exchange for the corrupt acts committed whilst in office