Dim Dave's rose-tinted specs

Today, we are sort of blessed by a fantastical fairy story woven by our (less than) beloved Prime Minister writing in The Telegraph.  If you ever suspected that he inhabits a parallel universe this essay of his will convince you.  Passing by the tactful respects he pays to the late Jo Cox MP, he moves to his first point which is to stress that our economy absolutely and utterly depends on the EU.  This, I would remind you, is "a German racket" (the words of the late Nick Ridley) in which we run a huge trade deficit - er, HELLO, DAVE, are you hearing this? - that's deficit as in 'def-i-cit', and it's no good you asking that lad down the corridor in No. 11 what a deficit is because he hasn't a clue, he can't even balance our own financial books!  A trade deficit, Dave, is when they sell loads more to us than we can sell to them, so if we depart are they suddenly going to stop selling us all those Mercs and polluting VWs?  No, I didn't think so.

Then, in an example of tortuous illogicality, you tell us that we, a nuclear power with the fifth biggest economy in the world would be diminished by leaving an organisation which dilutes our power across 27 other states, many of whom, suffering as they are with imminent bankruptcy and 50% youth unemployment, have other things on their mind than Britain and in any case if and when they do think about us they more or less dislike us!  Only a man of Dave's inherent dimness would fail to take the lesson offered by 'the colleagues' when he wasted several weeks touring Europe asking for some favours to help him win this referendum and instead of tossing some coins into his cap, they pissed in it!  And yet he can say with an absolutely straight face that "we are not one twenty-eighth of the EU; we are one hugely important, global player."  I tell you, he would have made a fortune flogging second-hand Bentleys (now German-owned since we joined the EU!) in Berkeley Square.  What is it about an Eton education that makes you such an accomplished liar as well as a fool?

Of course, if we VOTE LEAVE there will be problems but problems have dogged this country throughout its history - and most of them have emanated from Europe!  And time and time again we have overcome those problems by acting independently and in our own self interest.  We weave alliances to suit our purposes at any given time.  The idea that we should volunteer to shackle ourselves  forever to the interests of, say, Bulgaria, or Greece, or Romania, all of whom dance to the tune played by the 'Berlin Philharmonic' would be a madness.

One thing Cameron wrote was absolutely true: "And so rarely will we ever make a decision of such magnitude. And here’s the thing: it’s irreversible."  Quite so, if we vote to stay in, all the exit doors will slam shut - forever!

 

Comments

[Pat]

I disagree that the EU was set up as a German racket, though I can see why it would appear so. The Germans have been the main paymasters of the EU throughout- probably war guilt at least to start with, and also because Erhard's bonfire of the regulations made them rich.
Latterly they've been benefiting from the Euro- a French idea which they agreed to in return for re-unification. Benefiting that is in comparison to other Eurozone states who are being progressively bankrupted by the idiot currency. The Germans are therefore running out of Eurozone customers and their external trade is increasingly with non EU countries. If this continues the Germans are going to ask themselves what they are paying all that money for- in fact they have already started.
I suspect that the five presidents proposal for an EU wide tax (which must fall mainly on Germans since they have most of the money) will prove to be the last straw.
It would be nice to be out before the whole thing collapses!

[Antisthenes]

As usual Duffers I am in complete accord with you except on one important point the current account deficit. The trade imbalance is not a pointer to the health or not of a nation. Many counties import more than they export and are affluent and some who export more than they import are not. Even Adam Smith in the 18th century was perplexed by that fact. The reasons are simple and the consequences can be quite beneficial Hayek, Mises and the like understood why but it would take to long to explain here.

[Peter Whale]

"It would be nice to be out before the whole thing collapses!"

Pat says it all very succinctly. From Greece to Italy all the med states are in mass unemployment and bankrupt monetarily and politically. The French slow motion socialist train wreck will one day reach the buffers. Looking to the Northern states all are awaiting the UK referendum before they jump ship. The Germans will love buying the Euro bonds which they were told would never happen.

"Events dear boy Events"

Junker and Lagarde one a proven crook the other facing serious fraud allegations. Why would you put them in charge of anything unless they do your bidding which now brings us to mad Merkle.

Socialism = Catastrophe always.

Vote leave I have cast my postal vote already.

[David Duff]

Pat, you are absolutely right that the Germans have benefited hugely from a currency that isn't worth a toss which makes their exports so much cheaper. Also you are right that they pay much of the running costs of the EU 'apparat' but when it comes to providing money for bankrupts like Greece, suddenly they dig their heels in. However, for Europe to become one country they will be forced to do it. Let's see how they like them 'Äpfels'! The proposed EU tax is the one subject Cameron keeps well away from.

I agree, Antis, but to keep banging on about how wonderful it is for the Europeans (ie, Germany) to sell more to us than we sell to them and then allowing them to tie our hands seems bizarre to me!

[David Duff]

Our comments crossed, Peter, but your OBE is in the post!

[Loz]

You're locked in a bygone era when Britain had an empire to mask it's inadequacies, with lots of cheap labour and exploitation to make from the colonials and natives.

Eventually the inadequacies proved too much for the challenges it faced, and Britain lost the lot.

As an "independent trading nation" without the "empire racket" we were a disaster. From 1945 to 1975 the British constitution, political class, and voters revealed their true qualities: The country went from hero to zero in thirty years.

While Germany did it's "economic miracle", and America went from strength to strength, Britain declined to become the basket case of the West. Bailed out by the IMF and begging the EU to take us in, the lie of British superiority was exposed; constitution, political elite, and voters, all third rate.

Since then, two things again flattered to deceive the country bumpkin brigade: Thatcher and the single market. The one in a thousand years Godsend of Mrs T was always lost on the majority of the blundering voters who elected her, and the elite around her. Her legacy of anti anti-competitive state behaviour and free markets with free movement of labour, capital, goods, and services proved unsustainable by the British constitution, and demonized by the elites and the great unwashed it had to find sanctuary in a foreign power: The EU.

Without the spoonfed rules and regs of the single market, Britain will descend quickly to the chaos of 1975. With a constitution, political elite, and voters as they are, there is no other possible outcome.

SoD

[Loz]

Anti, spot on.

The country bumpkin brigade are intrinsically mercantilist in their world view, in spite of the ideology having been thoroughly discredited by free market economics.

"Netting off" is beyond them, but they can just about cope with the difference between deficit and debt.

SoD

[backofanenvelope]

Loz, whoever he is, is typical of the Westminster/Whitehall ruling class. The people who disagree with him are "country bumpkins". He, on the other hand, is a super smart supporter of a ruling class that has brought the EU to its current state.

The EU was conceived as a French construct to keep them in the style they are accustomed to. France is now descending into chaos and Germany is run by a mad old bat who thinks a couple of million Arabs is a good idea.

We should get out while we can.

[Loz]

BOE, I don't disagree with your assessment of the EU.

With two dismal options, HMG or EU, it doesn't make sense to put "rose tinted spectacles" on for either of them.

Nor can we have neither as an explicit choice that's not on offer directly

Rather we can have the best of both less the worst of both by letting the two rats fight in the bag.

As a result of the outcry from the nation states, Merkel has changed direction. As a result of the single market, Britain has retained the legacy of Thatcher in spite of itself.

The actual, but counter intuitive, outcome of having two harmful bullies in the playground is that rather than getting twice as much bullying you get none. Because the two bullies are so busy fighting each other they leave you alone. Better still, you can provoke one to counter the other at will.

That's why being in the EU, but not in the Euro, is the least worst place to be.

SoD

[David Duff]

SoD, did you actually pass your history exam at school? After WWII, the *British people* swallowed the socialist dream and paid the price - but note that it was the *British people* who decided on that. When the results became clear, they swallowed the EU dream and again, it was the *British people* who decided to join. Now, having realised that the dream is a nightmare and for absolutely the last time the *British people* have the chance to decide again. If we stay in the *British people* will be entirely and absolutely under the rule of the Five Presidents who themselves are under the rule of Berlin.

Or, to put it another way, if we stay in, the British people can say what they like but 'vill obey orders' - or else! How Bismarck, the Kaiser and Adolf Hitler must be chuckling! It has taken 120-odd years but finally they will have what they want!

[mike fowle]

"...he wasted several weeks touring Europe asking for some favours to help him win this referendum and instead of tossing some coins into his cap, they pissed in it!"

Thank you for the most succinct and accurate summary of the "negotiations". Brilliant.

[backofanenvelope]

The problem with having two bullies in one playground is that they will gang up on you!

[David Duff]

Two excellent pieces in The Telegraph today. The first by the American-born Janet Daly:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/06/18/how-did-the-remain-campaign-get-the-british-character-so-wrong/

The other from the inimitable 'Hefferlump':

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/06/19/the-eu-empire-is-going-to-fail-on-thursday-we-can-protect-britai/

And as SoD seems fixated on Empire then I will quote one section of the 'Hefferlump's' essay:

"But dominating everything is a wider, connected truth: which is that all empires fail. They fail because of over-reach, and because they seek to control people determined to control themselves. The EU is an empire, albeit one not achieved by military conquest; and the signs of its decay have been obvious since long before the current, and insoluable, crisis of the euro. What has happened in Greece – and another instalment of debt repayment is about to destabilise it and the eurozone again – is indicative of why the EU cannot go on like this."

To vote to stay in is like rowing a boat towards the Titanic and then going aboard!

[Pat]

The British Empire was founded to enable the British to trade worldwide in an age when others would use military means to stop us. It was good when it started, but like all organisations became self serving. Britain could have abandoned the Empire with little loss of trade and much saving of money anytime from 1900, probably earlier.
The election of 1945, following on from years of socialist propaganda under the guise of public information films and the involving the omission of very many service votes brought about a socialist government, who strengthened many special interests and weakened the country. The Conservative governments that followed were effectively conservative- that is whilst they had opposed the introduction of socialist measures, they didn't want to change anything back.
Britain's accession to the EEC did nothing to improve the ailing economy.
That started to happen when Maggie got in and started (but assuredly did not finish) to roll back the state.
We are currently embroiled in the EU which seeks to regulate everything down to the curvature of cucumbers, and is everywhere seeking to enlarge it's own power. It has cunningly sold this power grab as a market- which it is not. The single market is destroying prosperity throughout the EU, for although it does ease cross border trade it inhibits in state trade- and in state trade is about 80% of all trade. It also backs special interests (with our money!) in order to buy their support. Given time their policies will put us back where we were in 1979- not because that is their objective, but because they have no economic objective- everything they do is to expand their power.
The EU is constantly seeking to expand. Indeed its efforts to expand into Ukraine started a war. Perhaps if it gets its dreamed of army it might start expanding by military means. I'd rather that didn't happen, and I want out before it does.

[Cuffleyburgers]

Two quite insightful psts byat to which I would onld add, that the rot set in after the first WW when the idea became common currency that the most effective way to run things was statism.

After the second it was even clearer. It is obvious in hindsight but that it was complete bollocks, but it suited governments to have people believe it.

The rot took longer to set in in the US but the cold war helped and when that was over panic set in until the saudis obligingly attacked the twin towers.

Over here the damage was initially covered up by marshall aid, but by the 70s as loz loves to remind us things had got pretty bad. Fortunately being a self governing people we were able to elect a leader who charted a viable way out, a model which was subsequntly followed in many other countries with great success everywhere.

After major signed away our sovereignty before disappearing into well deserved oblivion all accountability was removed from the by now enormous government machine.that is why we are so incapable of electing decent leaders.

It is my firm opinion that once proper democratic accountability is restored to Whitehall and Westminster that we will see an uptick in the quality of political debate and also the quality of the amoeba who infest those places.

[David Duff]

Well said, Gentlemen!

[Bob]

Comments here are more interesting than the sparse coverage the "Brexit" gets in the US, which is mainly concerned with possible consequences to our financial markets.

The only point I might add is that you should not be too confident the US will rush to create trade agreements with the UK. Our corporate interests will probably continue to mainly seek the most favorable agreements possible with the most economically disadvantaged "partners."

[jimmy glesga]

When we leave the EU business will continue. The losers will be politicians who created their own unnecessary beaurocracy and milked the taxpayer. It will be a historic victory for working people and the retired who pay tax. A whole new bloodsucking unproductive class will be brought down if we vote Brexit. Vote Out.

[David Duff]

I don't think, Bob, that anyone 'over here' has any confidence that anyone will do us any favours but the funny thing about trade is that the participants cannot resist a profit. So long as everyone earns a buck, trade will go on.

Jimmy, you are right to the extent that several overpaid MEPs will have to get out and earn a living but our Westminster lot will continue much as before. As our French friends(?) put it, "Plus ça change mais plus c'est la meme chose".

[Bob]

My understanding, David, is that current trade between the US and UK is set under conditions including input from the EU. Some here claim that new agreements will have to be constructed, and that they will take a long time.

[JK]

Bob? Have you seen this? 53 minutes well spent I think.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UTMxfAkxfQ0

[Loz]

Gaffer, you keep retreating into your fastness argument of "the British people", saying that no matter how ghastly HMG alone will be it's all ok simply because "the British people" decided.

So what happens if Britain disintegrates because of Brexit? Northern Ireland to prevent renewed conflict, and Scotland because, well, they're Sweaties and they want to. Maybe even the taffs too.

Then there would be no Britain. What will your argument be then?

SoD

[Pat]

If, and it is an if, the Scots, Welsh and Irish feel they are better off alone then good luck to them. I doubt it, but nevertheless good luck to them. We English (and in my view we British) do not need a disgraced former Luxembourg Prime minister to tell us what to do.

[john malpas]

It will happen like this. Brexit will occur - in theory -but at a snails pace.
Meanwhile the british politicians will discover that they were sort of misled and ergo the people misled.
More time passes.
Meanwhile the young in schools are told the errors of their parents and how to make things right.
A realignmemt of the UK will be proposed.
And the whole thing starts again.

[Michael Adams]

So sorry, cousins, to hear of your troubles. I really am, and they are awfully similar to our own. However, I am going to have another GRAND CHILD in February!!! Therefore I can not get too down in the dumps about anything. We had a Fathers' Day lunch at son and daughter-in-law's house, and they told us then. Huzzah! Yippee! Hosannah! Now, what were y'all trying to say about politics and economics? I lost the thread there, somewhere.

[backofanenvelope]

I don't think we should get too excited about all this. If we vote to leave, then an extended period of dithering will ensue. Cameron will need time to think things over and won't want to disturb Osborne's master plan for the economy. If we vote remain he will just carry on as he has over the last six years.

[David Duff]

SoD, by "British people" I mean Parliament which is elected by the British people. If parts of the country wish to break away it will be a pity but the crucial point is that *our* Parliament, elected by *us*, will take the decisions and if we don't like them then we will boot them out. If and when you can tell me how we could dispose of 'Junck the Drunk' I might, just might, reconsider my views on Europe. Of course, you can't do that because the fact is that he is irremovable. He and the other four 'Presidents' will tell you what to do and there is sweet FA you can do about it. That, for your information, is called dictatorship!

Michael, I look forward to reading about your 'Texit'!

[AussieD]

Didn't you have a pollie called Tony Benn at one stage? I'm too bloody lazy to Google him to check but I kept an exerpt from an article which quoted him in respect to democracy.

He suggested five questions you should ask someone in power. They are;

– What power do you have;
– Where did you get it;
– In whose interests do you exercise it
– To whom are you accountable
– How can we get rid of you?

Anyone who cannot answer the last of those questions does not exist in a democratic system.

Good luck on Thursday. I look forward to the Nation that gave us our concept of democracy voting to get theirs back.

[Loz]

"If and when you can tell me how we could dispose of 'Junck the Drunk' I might, just might, reconsider my views on Europe"

Aha! Really?

So if the EU had an elected executive (President and cabinet elected by all electorate, not just the constituents as it is with the PM and his cabinet in HMG), and the executive didn't have a vote in the legislative body (as it does in the cranky UK), and the legislative body was elected (it is in the EU already, but only half in the UK - house of lords isn't), and the judicial body was independent (both UK and EU could improve), you'd be happy to reconsider your EU stance?

And what do the rest of the Outters think?

Might find yourself in the Popular Front (our favourite - he's over there!") before you can say "splitter!".

Welcome back to your lattes served by long-legged, pert-breasted, razor-cheek-boned, inky-blinky-darlinkies!

SoD

[Whitewall]

Michael Adams...Congratulations!

AussieD, well said!

[Loz]

Damn - looks like I was spotted on my "prepare for Brexit" Boston-New York recce ...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2016/06/20/had-enough-these-are-the-most-popular-countries-for-brits-lookin/

... The entire professional (and in my case, the not-so-professional) class of Blighty is going to reboard the Mayflower and leave the country bumpkins and chavs to their "perfect democracy", and "Go West".

Vote Hillary! No walls please, I'm not as fit as the days I did P Company.

Mind you, looking at the polls, Britain First and their first murdering scumbag might have done the trick and saved the country - not in exactly the way intended. Viva the law of unintended consequences and village idiots.

I guess the only 747 I'll be on in the near future is the 747 from Camberley to Waterloo.

SoD

[Dom]

I don't have a dog in this fight, and I don't understand all the issues, but I thought you'd enjoy John Oliver on the remain side.

https://youtu.be/iAgKHSNqxa8

The ending is genius.

[Bob]

JK, I skimmed through the video. There are parallels in arguments against the EU and those made here against "free trade" agreements.

[David Duff]

SoD, as you failed to provide a means to dispose of 'Junck the Drunk' I assume you do not have one. So my advice to you is do a runner for any English-speaking country that will have you before another Iron Curtain descends on Europe.

[JK]

Bob, I'll give you that. The "parallels" at any rate. And (or but), I suppose I should outright state that, as a US citizen whose not been outta the country *for awhile* - at least the EUish bits - I'm not as up on the arguments as I probably ought be, commenting here as I do.

I do however Bob, have some suspicions (and merely that, suspicions) we two likely have some difference of opinion where "free trade" is concerned. At least I further suspect, from the US perspectives.

But I think David had it more correctly than not in his 2010 [GMT] response to yourself.

You're familiar with the phrase, Shit Happens Bob?

Well, it's true in the case of trade as well.

(I'm familiar with "our" defense acquisitioning Bob. That's the one area of trade I feel confident enough to express an opinion. And my opinion is as you may've seen it expressed on these here pages of D&N I hae me doots as to say, BAE having its trade prospects with Lockheed Martin much, if any, dimmed were a BREXIT to occur.

You may be aware too Bob, from where still get our "heavy lifter" rocket engines? In spite of our sanctions against that nation?

Surely you'd not Bob, opine the US would *sanction* the UK over a successful BREXIT [and have such sanctions be more effective] than when shit like Crimea happens?)

[KevinS]

Welcome to the Hotel California - "You can check out any time you like, but you can never leave" Vote - leave, it's the only logical choice!