Germany wants a say in underwriting the debts of Greece and Italy due to moral hazard. If it gave an unconditional guarantee of those debts then what is to stop those countries reneging on their promises in relation to reducing government debt?
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
NSC's EU Vote
- Thread starter Uncle Spielberg
- Start date
Germany wants a say in underwriting the debts of Greece and Italy due to moral hazard. If it gave an unconditional guarantee of those debts then what is to stop those countries reneging on their promises in relation to reducing government debt?
And this is exactly the type of statement I've been posting about. Fine you have an opinion but at least back it up with some theories etc as to WHY it would be a mistake. Remember, in 2010, our single biggest export market to a COUNTRY was the USA.
Bit disingenuous though WS as currently 48% of all exports go to fellow EU countries. The US is the biggest importer as a single country in the world, and has a population four times of that of any individual EU country. The US is therefore the biggest export market for many many countries, not just the UK.
The US is set to be overtaken as the world's biggest importer by China by 2013 or 2014. Sadly we export less to China than we do to...........Belgium.
We are reaping the dividend of the destruction of British manufacturing in the post war period due to inadequate investment, over zealous unions and clueless short term management.
Chicken Runner61
We stand where we want!
- May 20, 2007
- 4,609
As El pres has pointed out you need to look at the US in conjunction to what and who else we export to. Also China is what its all about for Germany. They are worried about how they will trade with China who could damage their exports across the globe. Germany needs to be strong over the next few years which is why Merkle needs to show her electorate she isn't bailing out the rest of the EU.
Also Did our exports to the USA include Finance services? If Camerons veto backfires it could mean that financial services could move to Paris away from london. Seeing as the Sq Mile's influence on his party is the main reason he vetoed it it could be a very costly mistake. Seeing as the financial crisis was caused by the banks why is Cameron acting like a Chambermaid (as some one said on the radio this morning) and clearing up after them?
I worried that in the USA there is a increasing feeling of discontent with the banks and the way they operate mixing speculative trading with high street banking and they may be cut back. As financial services is our only industry that could hit us hard and I don't get the impression that China will want the UK as a financial centre. China seems to do what is in China's interests and no one elses.
- Aug 7, 2003
- 8,019
Leave and revitalise the Commonwealth
- Jan 18, 2009
- 4,866
beorhthelm
A. Virgo, Football Genius
- Jul 21, 2003
- 35,851
also distorted view, as a peice this week pointed out, exports that go beyond the EU via Antwerp and Rotterdam get counted as exports to EU rather than their true destinations. it was also pointed out we export more to Ireland than China, so we clearly arent doing as much as we could with some markets. though that means there is scope for improvment.
beorhthelm
A. Virgo, Football Genius
- Jul 21, 2003
- 35,851
how do you make that conclusion? with a Financial Transaction Tax to be imposed in the Eurozone countries, why would a bank like say Citibank or Morgan Stanley move their operations to Paris or Frankfurt? what about all the non-banking operations like LIFFE and LME? there are a number of reasons why they arent in Paris already, people do business in London because they like it here - believe it or not. if the euro countries do conspire to make this a rule of the EU down the line through some back door, the services still aren't going to go to Paris or Frankfurt, they'll leave the EU.
it occurs to me that if they keep the FTT plan, we stand to increase the financial services as Frankfurt operations move to London.
We don't produce what China wants. It's not a case of must try harder.
China doesnt buy anything, only produces. Which is why they are funding everyones debt. If the West fails , the goods stay in Chinese ports.
jakarta
Well-known member
Not keen on Range Rovers, Jaguars & Rolls-Royces then?
Lifelong Supporter
Well-known member
The French and also the Germans are said to be angry at the veto. That suggests to be at this stage the decision is a good one. Given that we are a financially strong nation compared to the majority of the zone I believe it inevitable that the EU would be looking for significant further financial support from us. It seems pretty clear to me that as of now there is not the support in the country for that. It is impossible to say what the future holds. For the present the Eurozone is in crisis and it is not a disadvantage to be at as distance from that if the French and Germans chose to be unsympathetic of our needs.
Screaming J
He'll put a spell on you
Yes, the EU gets it from us. The point I was making was that the EU was making it available for infrastructure and regeneration schemes. If the Treasury hadn't paid that money to the EU I doubt very much whether any money they saved by not paying it across would have been made available direct from the UK Treasury themselves to do something similar.
But you don't know that. What's happened is that the money went from the UK taxpayer, to the UK Government, to Brussels, and then back to the UK via the ESF or whatever quango dished it out. Each stage of that process cost money and meant there was actually less to invest than if the UK took responsibility for all the British 'EU funded' projects in the first place.
Electrik Blue
New member
- Jun 12, 2007
- 18
We were Great Britain before the Euro and we will be Great Britain after, we fought the second world war to stop Germany controlling us lets not hand it to them now