The
political and economic consequences of the UK leaving the
EU
An
analytical consideration from German view.
December
2012:
1.
The consequences for the
British
The
EU lobby is making every effort to prevent Britain from
leaving the EU. Under no circumstances, they believe, should
the British be allowed to have a referendum on this question
of fate.
They know the clear survey results: The majority of
British people want to get out of the EU.
The
fact that the British are in the EU at all is due to their
former representatives of the people, who had enacted
accession in 1973 (without popular consent). In retrospect
(1975) there was a referendum on this important question of
destiny - but a negative vote would have meant a complex
reversal at a time when the effects of the treaties were
still completely unknown.
The anti-democratic accession process was the EU's
characteristic feature even then. To date, the EU has not
yet abandoned its anti-democratic stance.
The
EU costs Britain 53 million euros - every
day!
EU critics have calculated that, despite all the special
discounts granted, the EU is costing the island kingdom 53
million euros per day.
The EU lobby obviously does not want to know about these
figures. It counters with scare mongering and predicts the
economic collapse if Britain leaves the EU.
"The
British industrial production would collapse
..."
In
the German media, too, there is quite unanimous warning in
the run-up to the worst consequences of an EU withdrawal
from Great Britain.
The forecast: The import duty imposed by the EU countries
would make British goods too expensive. Foreign investors
would then close their factories on the island and relocate
them to the European continent.
Admittedly, it is conceded casually that the UK, like
Switzerland, could possibly negotiate special customs
agreements with the EU. But this is very complicated and
would have some disadvantages.
The
healing counterforces are
ignored!
But the prophecies of the EU advocates are devoid of logic.
Even if there were no special bilateral customs agreements,
the EU exit would be a blessing for the British economy!
The EU independence that would then exist would release
undreamt - of forces. If the EU Member States impose
their tariffs on British goods, the British Government will
counteract in the same way.
Imports
from the EU will then become more expensive in Great
Britain! This in turn means that British industry is
becoming more competitive!
It
would then again be worthwhile to produce many consumer
goods in your own country.
Thus,
at least in part (depending on the level of import duties),
the UK would be exposed to both intra-European and global
wage, tax, social and environmental dumping competition.
What would be wrong with that?
The British can not do anything better in terms of economics
than out of the unfair European pseudo-domestic
market.
The
European internal market does not really exist!
What
is always concealed or misinterpreted in all the half-smart
speeches about the EU:
A
true EU single market does not
exist!
The
basic requirements for a genuine single market are
met in only one point:
|
same
gross wage rates
|
None
|
same
tax
|
None
|
same
social laws
|
None
|
same
Law
|
None
|
same
political structures
|
None
|
same
mother tongue
|
None
|
same
official language
|
None
|
duty-free
|
Yes
|
Except
for the last point, therefore, all the requirements of a
genuine internal market are in no way fulfilled.
The
EU internal market thus turns out to be a deceptive
wrapper,
a deceptive illusion, a mirage.
A genuine EU internal market would bring economic benefits -
but the current structure cannot work. It is absurd and
contradictory - in a word: idiotic.
In
60 years, it has not been possible to make any progress on
this crucial point. Because a genuine internal market
requires a homogeneous single state, which most EU countries
reject strictly.
"Britain's
EU withdrawal would weaken the financial metropolis of
London."
The propaganda machinery of the EU defenders is in full
swing. Not only is there a warning (with dishonest
arguments) against the "total decline" of British industry,
but it is also predicted to have devastating consequences
for the London financial market.
In fact, London's importance as a financial centre may well
diminish (this is far from being a foregone conclusion). But
if the assumption were to come true - what would be so bad
about it?
At
present, the financial markets are completely inflated and
oversized.
95 per cent of all financial transactions are only
speculative and therefore completely unproductive. They
are more likely to be a cancer of capitalism - to the
detriment of any economy.
This
financial sector has become so absurdly established in New
York and London only because the US and Britain needed a
replacement for the decline of their industrial
base.
The swelling of the financial sector made millions of
speculators, traders, investment advisors, investment
bankers, etc. worldwide rich - but at the expense of the
population and the real economy.
The
normalisation of the City of London and the move away from
duty-free dumping would unleash undreamt-of forces which
would help Britain to flourish again.
"Imports
duties on EU goods would deprive the British of purchasing
power!"
In order to avoid a positive exit example in any case, fears
are fomented with all registers. An important intimidation
argument is the assertion that the British import tariffs
would make everything more expensive and the British
purchasing power would decrease.
But
even such fears turn out to be nonsense. After all,
customs duties do not disappear into nirvana. Rather,
they make it possible to reduce wage-related social
security contributions. This reduces labour costs and at
the same time strengthens the company's competitiveness
vis-à-vis foreign countries.
2.
the impact of Britain's EU exit on the European
Union
So far, the EU's raison d' être has always been linked
to the promise of prosperity, freedom and peace. "A country
like Great Britain would go under economically without EU
ties and would not be perceived from a world-political point
of view. That, at any rate, is the official theory of
prosperity, which should nip any doubts about the EU in the
bud.
If
Britain's EU withdrawal would set a precedent for
the...
The worst
case scenario
for the EU's powerful lobby and the tens of thousands of
highly remunerated EU employees would be an economic revival
of Britain after the EU's withdrawal.
Imagine Britain, as an independent sovereign state,
overcoming mass unemployment and reducing the national
deficit. And inflation-adjusted net wages and pensions would
suddenly pick up noticeably after a period of more than 30
years of gradual decline.
How
are we going to keep the continental Europeans at
bay?
How will they be persuaded to continue to recognise the EU
and the sacred "European internal market" (which in reality
does not exist - see above) as prerequisites for prosperity?
The whole house of cards of lies and propaganda would
collapse and other stressful EU peoples will want to
follow the British example.
For
example, Britain's EU withdrawal could mark the end of the
European Union.
The EU's profiteers (especially the 50,000 EU bureaucrats)
would have to fear for their money. A terrible vision for
those affected - but a blessing for all upright Europeans
who really care about the well-being of the
people.
Britain's
EU exit would open the eyes of all Europeans. The
nimbus of the prosperous and peace-building EU
would be lost once and for all.
|
PS:
According to a survey by the OpinionWay Institute in
December 2014, 42% of Britons would vote for leaving the EU,
while only 37 voted in favor. The real referendum should
take place at the latest by the end of 2017. For the Dutch,
39% argued for and 41% against leaving the EU. In Germany,
only 22% of Germans would welcome an EU exit. In view of
decades of unilateral long-term propaganda in favor of the
EU ("Germany
particularly benefits from the EU and the
euro"),
the broad German acceptance of the EU can hardly be
surprising.
Supplement
25.5.2016:
Is
that the much-vaunted freedom of the
press?
Intimidation
of the British population...
One
month before the decisive Brexit referendum on
23.6.2016, the British newspaperstycoone will
really get down to business. On the front pages of
their opinion-forming tabloids, they aggressively
weather against the threatening brexite. Nothing
seems sacred anymore! One is light years away from
a factual argument.
The
newspaper publishers apparently see it as their
Christian duty to insecure and intimidate the
doubting population with bold statements.
For example, they predict an economic decline of 6%
in the event of a brexite, accompanied of course by
a drastic rise in unemployment. And they are
already predicting an 18% drop in the price of real
estate. And yes, of course: the danger of war in
Europe will also increase as a result of the
brexite.
Surely
it is clear that such bad tidings fuel fears. I
believe, moreover, that these predictions are
criminal and totally unrealistic. Decoupling from
the paralyzing Brussels bureaucracy monster can
only have a positive effect in the end - whoever
claims the opposite is not credible.
On
May 23,2016 in England I looked closely at the
daily newspapers - the atmosphere against the
brexite was omnipresent. Hardly any catastrophe
scenario has been omitted to intimidate readers. It
is astonishing that it was not also claimed that
the British island would sink into the Atlantic
Ocean in the event of a brexite.
What
is the value of referendums if the population is so
massively influenced?
This shows once again how difficult it is to beat
the dominance of big business. With the media in
their possession, they can manipulate the opinion
of their readers to a large extent and enforce or
prevent almost anything that does not serve the
benefit of corporations or big business.
Only
once, in Switzerland, the systematic panic
mongering has not yet worked. Despite all the
prophecies of doom and doom, the Swiss once voted
bravely against joining the EU.
So, has Switzerland subsequently perished or
dwindled into insignificance? The exact opposite is
the case! Despite the difficult environment,
surrounded by a dwindling EU with excessive
monetary dumping, Switzerland is doing better than
ever today.
Background:
British
farmers' fear of
brexite!
"But
most industrial products can't be made in England
anyway!" http://www.anti-globalisierung.de/globalization-production.html
|
After
the referendum:
Reason
has triumphed,
the ignoramuses have lost!
The
23rd of June 2016 will go down in history as a lucky
day for both Britain and Europe. Because with this date,
a people has finally renounced Brussels paternalism. In
the medium and long term, even the most ardent EU
fanatic will have to admit that the EU is an eternal trouble
spot and a killer of prosperity.
The British economy can now breathe new life into
itself, freed from bureaucratic obstacles and exempted
from the perverted foreign wage and tax dumping through
customs duties.
I
hope that this will also bring more honesty and honesty back
to the annoying EU debate. Fewer and fewer people will fall
for the deceptive illusion of the beneficial "EU internal
market" (which in reality does not exist - see
above).
The
EU divides Europe!
The transfiguring peace rhetoric is also increasingly losing
its credibility. More and more people are beginning to
understand: If the EU had not existed, the Ukrainian war
would not have broken out in the first place.
And
now Scotland and Northern Ireland want to become independent
by hook or crook and degrade the United Kingdom to Little
Britain for centuries. Here too, the question arises:
would such separation efforts exist even without the
"peacemaking" EU?
But
there's more: the division runs through the entire island
kingdom. Even before the vote, the financially strong
pro-EU lobby initiated a petition for a second
referendum in the event of its failure.What a shabby
attempt! Do we still have to step down, show ourselves as
bad losers, trample democracy underfoot and ignore clear
referenda? Yuck!
"Young
people voted to stay!"
The older and less well educated Brits voted for the brexite
allegedly disproportionately. The constant reference to this
voting behaviour is meant to tell us that the stupid and
elderly (which will soon die anyway) were for the brexite
and ruin the future of the young, educated
generation.
Of
course, this analysis can be interpreted in a completely
different way:
The elderly British, who still knew the good times before
the EU and had to endure the exodus of British industry, who
were able to watch hundreds of thousands of factories being
relocated to low-wage countries because of the tariff cuts -
these long-suffering contemporary witnesses know from
their own experience what the EU has done.
Young
people, on the other hand, lack these own experiences.
Their attitude was shaped by the mostly one-sided EU
propaganda in schools and universities.
Young academics are still full of hope and dream of a
steep career due to their long, expensive training, but at
least of a carefree life in the upper echelons of
prosperity. Not until ten or twenty years from now would
many of them think differently, purified and disillusioned.
Because (overall) the tariff-free dumping competition does
not offer a rosy outlook.
"The
populists have won!"
By the way, do you know what a populist is? The answer is
actually quite simple: A populist is who speaks out
against the EU.
Who is for the EU, however, may consider itself as
cosmopolitan, intelligent do-gooder. At least that's what
the EU establishment tries to portray.
Because
I have the arrogant conclusion "The Populists have won!"
worse, I have as a return coach with the heading used above
"The reason has triumphed, the ignorant have lost!"
countered.
Whereby,
I think, my saying is justified far more than the stupid
populist reproach. Because my theses can be justified in
detail. You will find more details in my short essay
"We
have to explain Europe
better!"
- or in detail in my book listed below.
Challenge
of the referendum because brexite supporters
lied?
Does the EU cost Britain EUR 350 million or only EUR 100
million per week? Because the brexite camp allegedly argued
with false numbers, EU supporters are calling for a repeat
referendum. Such an approach seems ridiculous, however,
because the powerful EU lobby has sinned far more with its
unprecedented campaign of fear.
But
let's analyse the figures!
Of course, it is not only the direct British transfers to
the EU that should be used, but also the returns. However,
the question arises as to the usefulness of these subsidies.
Subsidies are not wrongly considered to be a cancer of
the market economy. Because they cause momentous
misdirections and misinvestments. In the worst case, they do
far more harm than good.
Unfortunately, there is a lack of perception: when it comes
to corruption and bribery, everyone knows the consequences
of these excesses. However, in the case of subsidies (which
can ultimately exert similarly counterproductive forces on
the economy) this sense of injustice does not yet exist. It
would be foolish to blindly register subsidies on the credit
side. Because their true value is questionable,
incalculable.
On
the other hand, what matters most in fair accounting is the
enormous expenditure on bureaucracy, the inflating of
administrative expenses. Nobody can quantify these costs
seriously. However, it can be assumed that these expenses
alone exceed the disputed sum of 50 million euros per
day.
But
we are far from being at the end of our payroll. The
unnecessary goods tourism caused by the EU not only
sustainably damages the environment of the island state, it
also affects the health of the people living there. How do
you calculate all this?
But
there's more. The "international
division of labour"
is highly inefficient. It only pays off for manufacturers
because of the extreme wage and tax differentials.
It is the absurd wage differentials that are responsible for
the closure of tens of thousands of factories in Britain,
the insurmountable mass unemployment, millions of precarious
(underpaid) jobs, declining wages and pensions.
So
anyone who thinks that EUR 50 million in costs for the EU is
too high has not recognised the true dimensions of the EU's
debacle. In fact, the damage caused by the EU in the UK is
more
likely to amount to EUR 1 billion a
day.
"There
can't be a sovereign nation-state
anymore!"
I find it disgraceful, as proven "EU experts" step in front
of the camera and insolent again and again claim "sovereign
states the size of Great Britain or Germany can't even exist
today"!
How
do these people come up with such nonsense?
Are
all states outside the EU not
sovereign?
If their governments no longer have power, do they only have
to bow to the impenetrable world of finance and casino
capitalism? Are sovereign states dependent on the
"international division of labour" free trade zones and over
30 free trade agreements? Knowing well how absurd and
inefficient goods tourism drives climate change and damages
our health, nature and environment?
Since
1980, income and pensions have been falling in the old
industrial nations. This paradoxical demise should surprise
even the greatest ignorant and the most beautiful speaker!
This should lead to a rethink or paradigm shift!
There
are popular opinion leaders on television complaining about
new trade agreements, exchange rates, increasing exports and
so on. Even
though you don't need it at
all.
A state the size of Germany would be perfectly capable of
producing the vast majority of its consumption needs
domestically (even the small GDR, punished by the planned
economy, was able to do so). World trade could be reduced to
a reasonable level.
The
British, too, do not have to negotiate reflexively new,
complex and dependent contracts with the rest of the EU.
What's
the point?
In the past, such agreements were not needed either! What
kind of "free trade"is it if only corporations with
oversized legal departments can participate in it?
Despite higher tariffs, world trade was a few decades ago
more free and uncomplicated.
"The
brexite hurts everyone!"
It is breathtaking to see the enthusiasm and self-confidence
of established politicians and journalists claiming that the
brexite is a pity without exception for all (both in Britain
and the rest of the EU). Why are these "elites" so convinced
that only the excessive import and export of goods leads to
prosperity?
Is
there no longer any confidence in the efficiency of one's
own economy?
Do you really think that a country the size of Britain would
be incapable of producing its own TV sets, household goods,
cars, kitchen utensils, office machines, mobile phones,
textiles and shoes? Do we think that the exploitation of
labour slaves in low-wage countries is essential?
How
does one come up with the idea of relying on a high export
quota, duty-free access to the EU's internal market and thus
automatically on 33 further binding free trade agreements
worldwide?
80-90% of foreign trade is not only superfluous but also
harmful! With a globally harmonised wage level, world
trade would shrink to between 10 and 20% of its current
level!
Whether
the brexite is successful or not is now in the hands of the
British government itself. Does it seize the opportunity to
decouple the country from intra-European and global wage
dumping? Will it initiate re-industrialisation by rejecting
global destructive competition through cautiously rising
tariffs?
Continuing
along the same lines as before, replacing old EU trade
agreements with new special agreements would be absolutely
wrong.
In fact, it would be of little use if the accumulated
problems were not solved.
It
would be catastrophic if the henchmen of big business were
to assert themselves and impose a neo-liberal policy on the
U. K. (reduction of capital gains taxes, social cuts,
etc.).
With a neo-liberal policy, the capital lobby would not only
be able to live out its primal instincts, but it would also
thwart the success of brexite, incite the anger and
disappointment of the British, prove the alleged usefulness
of the EU and free trade and nip the growing criticism of
the EU in the bud throughout Europe.
So let
us hope that the capital lobby will not prevail this
time!
Anyone
who wants a strong Europe cannot also want the EU
at the same time!
Because the EU means:
Instead
of an efficient market
economy
expensive
subsidy economy!
Instead
of democracy
paralysing
bureaucracy!
Instead
of clear decision-making
structures
negotiating
and tackling eternal negotiations with the 26 other
EU member states!
Instead
of state sovereignty
a creeping disenfranchisement and Brussels
paternalism!
Instead
of friendship between
nations
increasing
resentment and resentment!
Instead
of peace
fear
of social unrest and war operations in foreign
parts of the world!
Instead
of economic independence
an
absurd crisis-prone export-import devil's
circle!
Instead
of a manageable national banking
system
a
Europe-wide and worldwide woven, uncontrollable
network of speculation and banks!
Instead
of independent central banks, their own currency
and an interest rate, fiscal and economic policy
tailored to their own economyan all-powerful
ECB,
rampant
debt and transfer union.
Further
delegations of competence to the EU or even a
federal state of the "United States of Europe"
would create even greater problems.
The
inhomogeneous, bureaucratic subsidy and transfer
union ultimately ruins all EU
states.
If
Germany were still sovereign and independent with
adequate customs frontiers, our labour
income would be roughly
doubled
(according to productive progress).
Germany would then export less, but import much
less.
|
Excuse
me!
There is no equality of opportunity - even when it comes to
forming opinions. While the capital (corporations,
speculators, lobbyists, media, governments) can afford the
best translators, I have to settle for a simple language
program for financial reasons. I hope, however, that the
text is nevertheless reasonably understandable and that no
major mistakes have occurred. Thank you for your
understanding.
Manfred
Julius Müller, 24939 Flensburg (Flensburg has approx.
90,000 inhabitants and lies on the German-Danish
border)
Background
& Analysis:
A
list of the currently available translations into English
can be found here.
Unpopular
truths from Germany. The capitalist world by no means
functions in the way that the human being is brainwashed.
The hottest political taboo topics. The tough fight against
false doctrines and prejudices.
Background
and analysis:
New: Now
what comes: A hard or soft
Brexit?
Causes
and consequences of global economic
crisis
In
Germany wages have been falling since 1980.
Why?
The
taming of capitalism!
The capitalist Reformation! 42 theses for a fairer
world!
Germany:
The brazen proclamation of skills
shortage!
Globalization:
the ignorance of the facts
The
political and economic consequences of an
brexit
An
analytical consideration from German
view.
"We
have to explain Europe
better!"
When
will the Dexit? (the withdrawal of Germany from the
EU)
Impressum
©
Manfred J. Müller, Flensburg, Dezember 2012, Nachtrag
Mai/Juni 2016
Current
books by Manfred Julius Müller (unfortunately currently
only available in German):
CAPITAL
AND GLOBALIZATION
- only Euro 13.50
THE
CAPITAL and the world economic
crises
- only Euro 5.80
THE
CAPITAL and the welfare
state
- only Euro 7.90
OUT
OF THE EU or persevere until the
sinking?
- only Euro 5,90
The
free trade delusion
- only Euro 6.50
Humanity
knows no boundaries. Stupidity, but not
too!
- only Euro 6.80
Only
Fairtrade! The capitalist Reformation! 35 theses for a
fairer world!
- only 5,- Euro
Manfred
Julius Müller
has analyzed global economic processes for more than 30
years. He is the author of various books on the topics of
globalization, capitalism and politics. Some texts by
Manfred Julius Müller also found their way into
textbooks or are used for teacher training.
The
analyzes and texts by Manfred Julius Müller are
non-partisan and
independent!
They
are not, as is often the case, sponsored by state
institutions, global players, corporations, associations,
political parties, trade unions, the EU or capital
lobby!
|