EU - Some good, some bad, but incapable of

radical change - So Exit to make it better!

The EU is a child of the 70s. There are good bits and bad bits and that is why it is so difficult coming to a black and white decision. I want a Grey one and here is my reasoning on how to achieve it

Finances, sovereignty and immigration are the big ticket and seemingly irreconcilable items.

Transition proposes a plan  on how to achieve it

Finances

Finance has been debated to death, so to briefly sum up:

We give them 18 Bn, we get back 10Bn to support various useful projects in the UK, the remaining 8bn is used to pay the EU to manage our Trade agreements, and for unaccountable administration.

If we vote to Remain, then Trade and free movement of people carry on as normal.

If we vote Exit: Probably no change initially whilst we negotiate how we want to interact with the EU. Our exchange rate may alter to favour our exporters, and make it more costly to buy stuff abroad. No-one has offered a plan, so this seems vague and therefore risky, but don’t be put off.

Grey: As exit, so no change initially, exchange rate changes as for Exit, we form a new agreement together with Norway and Switzerland and anyone else who is interested in a different EU model based on open trade and free movement of goods, services and free movement of some people.

Here we need to discuss this aspect a bit further.

 

The Plan

1

Vote Exit

2

Crowd fund a new party and assemble as many great minds from across the spectrum as will join to shape this transition.

3

Financial changes

  • Keep free movement of goods and services (and pay the EU price)
  • Keep free internal movement with changes below
  • EU - enforce EU membership requirements on new  member countries
  • EU - review the membership of persistent laggards

4

Immigration changes

  • EU - restrict the number of countries being absorbed at any one time
  • UK - accurately measure headcount requiring services, and the cost of services
  • UK - raise taxes specific to services provided to internal movement immigrants. Benefitting business should pay.
  • EU - Set up central criminal database
  • UK - Refuse entry to those considered a risk - We manage our tolerance to risk.
  • EU - Educate external immigrants in EU values
  • EU - set up a points system for external movement of skilled workers

5

Sovereignty changes

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Immigration

First let us differentiate between movement of people within the EU, which in principle seems to work ok, and external migration into the EU which does not.

Internal movement. This is an intrinsic EU principle that is tied to the EU trade package of free movement of goods, services and people, and if it were applied as originally intended, then it would work pretty well. If the economies of one country require cheap or skilled labour then people from other countries with the requisite skills can just move and supply that demand, and trade flourishes. If people move without working they become benefit migrants (unless like some pensioners and super rich princelings they can support themselves). All generations benefit from visa free travel, and can take advantage of opportunities for living and working where they like.

When poorer countries first join the EU, their labour is likely to flow into the EU, but gradually as money flows back to that country, its economy should strengthen and the labour market stabilise. Personally I don’t mind helping countries out in this way if it is done intelligently. One issue is where more established countries never seem to stabilise and become like teenagers stuck to an EU breast. Greece, and to some extent Spain and Portugal fall into these categories. Another issue is when too many countries are let into the EU at once. We can only absorb and help elevate countries at a slow rate. Another is when countries are allowed to join when they have incompatible social issues or economic woes that are just too hard to fix, cultures which are inherently corrupt, no functional legal framework, large criminal elements, or who don’t allow free speech, or are protectionist. The EU has entrance requirement and standards but it does not apply them consistently.

The EU needs to change to restrict the number of countries being absorbed at any one time, and to enforce EU membership requirements on new countries. It must also review the membership of the laggards who lapse and help them to re-establish in a sustainable way forward. We cannot carry permanently sick countries and it should not be afraid to eject those who, for whatever reason, are unable to hack it.

For the UK, generally the people from EU countries such as Poland, France, Spain who come and work here have similar values, want to work, and we seem to get on ok. Those of us who want to live and work in Europe, do so freely and that seems to work ok too. There are however issues with our UK services. We need to acknowledge that service funding should be fundamentally linked to headcount. More people means more funding for NHS, education, prisons, transport, housing, pensions. I know that UK governments justify free movement by claiming more people = more tax revenue and they can then claim that their policies make the growth monkey appear each year, but the fact that our debt mountain is so huge and unsustainable and our services are still breaking under the strain means that service costs of free movement are greater than the growth/tax benefits.

Whichever way we vote we should rebase our services funding and link it to headcount. We need a way to accurately measure headcount requiring services, and a way to raise taxes specific to services provided to immigrants. This will mean we have to choose between how much we can support our old, ill and incapable and how much we tax the businesses and individuals that benefit from free labour movement

We also need to look at the border enforcement controls and how we can treat the undesirable aspect of free movement of criminals. Crimes in one country should equate to lockup (and judicial cost) in their country of origin. We need a way to deport and restrict the subsequent movement of those who are a constant threat.

So, internal movement generally works, but improvements are required by both ourselves and the EU

External movement. And this is where the conversation gets tricky.  We have an emotional PC run media and a weak government whose only solution to integrating diverse value sets is to force us never to talk about it or directly address the issues it causes. Migration into the EU needs to be urgently addressed, A few can be absorbed, but when the few become a larger force, in basic and obvious Darwinian terms, inevitably THEY will compete with US. If you have lived your formative years in an environment where murder rape, slavery, theft, dishonesty and phobias of other cultures are rife, you need to be educated into western values. Again this requires services and has a cost, currently unaccounted for in any budget. External immigrants originate from countries we have no influence over, and we cannot help them evolve and grow. We just take the ones who runaway and the cause of the problem does not change. The other factor to consider, again in purely Darwinian terms, is that the breeding rate of many of these countries is far greater than that of Europe -link= so the problem is not going away.

 Is the EU capable of resolving this problem quickly? Are the ills of external migration so great that we are prepared to exit and lose the benefits of EU free movement? Free movement only works where we have the same intrinsic cultural values. Don’t kill, don’t steal, work hard and support your family, contribute your taxes to the wider community who will provide services to you if you are ill or vulnerable, dont keep slaves, dont rape anyone especially children.....  Of course cultures and the way they demand you show allegiance by language, clothing, diet etc. have many aspects, but generally humans accept others if they are trustworthy and have the same core belief system.

The UK’s self-image is also an issue. In our rush to blindly support multi culturalism as the only method of coping with the more alien value systems, We have deliberately neglected British culture, and it now needs some re-invention to get us all to pull together. However, the Scots having recently re coalesced around their own culture, and in the absence of an integration strategy, and supported by modern technology like air travel and the internet,   strong multi-cultural ghettos have developed throughout the UK, and it just may not be possible to agree on enough common things to draw us together.

External movement needs radical change.

Vote Remain and the issues of multi cultural ghettos will continue to grow, anyone landing on EU borders can become a UK benefit migrant, more pressure on services, more Calais, more chaos on the Mediterranean borders, more terrorist activity, more dissent, no integration policy.

Vote Exit and what? No-one has yet put forward a plan for how to address the immigration issues. Border controls? Prevent any new migrants from outside and inside Europe? Set up and administer  a points system for every candidate migrant? Our PC element is also a force in this area. Those whose sentiments overrule common sense and our instinctive understanding of risk, and who constantly hold the door open in the blind belief that we can, like some home for stray dogs, provide services to  the never ending supply of strays created by the world.  However, unlike a dogs home, we are then prevented from rehoming them.  They will provide stiff resistance to change.

Vote Grey and we try to retain internal movement, but limit external movement (and those recently landed into the EU) to an agreed headcount so services can be properly funded. we promote integration through an education system for external migrants. In other words we gain control of OUR environment but can still play nicely with the world to OUR agreed capacity. Points systems ok in theory but are expensive to set up and administer at the scale of internal migration. We should set one up for external movement.

Sovereignty:

if we stay?

Then we have agreed that our parliament becomes a regional administration unit in the EU empire. Admittedly not immediately, but that route is inevitable. We should start to treat it more like a county council, and refocus the bulk of our attention on our MEPS, as they will have the wider power to negotiate on our behalf and promote our interests, competing with those of the rest of the EU. Our prime minister becomes a regional governor, and the real powers lie with our member on the EU commission. In this world it does not matter if Scotland or Wales divide off and deal directly with the EU, all countries are just regional entities. Then there is the dear old silent Great Stabiliser herself who at 90 is likely to pass on the chair to Charlie Boy during this period and give us more cause for social angst and a chance to renegotiate our contract with our monarchy. if we feel that internal fragmentation is inevitable , then this may be worth considering.

If we leave?

Parliament keeps its traditional role, but the scots may well break off and join the EU on whatever terms are offered. We can then make our own rules to suit us, securing our boundaries with whatever agreements we can arrange as an independent player in a pond with both bigger and smaller fish. We will be buffeted by the larger world players. There is still the Great Stabiliser change to consider, as well as the fact that we have no national culture to rally round - i think we would need to re-invent ourselves and our national identity - a new cultural revolution is required.

Existing EU interaction models (Norway, Canada, Switzerland) do not seem suitable and for some of the reasons above we should construct  a better one based on trade.  Internally we would still have to contend with our PC element and resolve the multiple cultural ghettoes which grow stronger as ours grows weaker, or maybe we will just continue to ignore it in an effort to delay confrontation till it becomes our children’s problem.

We could  also have the luxury of watching the EU experiment from the outside, and see how it pans out for them, maybe for a 100 years or so, and we could always try to re-join if it looked beneficial.

What might Grey look like?

Parliament becomes a true leader once again, leading change and seeking a new model for the EU. If we have all bought into this we may just coalesce into an evolution of what British actually means. A great experiment might just hold enough interest for the scots and the welsh and the northern Irish to join in this redefinition and emerge with a new contract for union. we try to gain control of those things that are important and experiment with a new agreement to manage those things we truly believe are common to like valued Europeans. Of course the EU will scoff and may think it is a competitor rather than an honest attempt at a beneficial alternative model.

 

Transition:

 If you think the EU experimental empire is going to struggle you can either try to change it from the inside, as the EU princes would like you to believe, or you can make a break for it, or you can try to form a new model that other EU countries could transition to if it proves to be better.

Remain:

looking further ahead, EU expansion is expected, and like the Eurovision song contestants, has global intentions. Could the existing EU model be the one that finally dispels human conflict by absorbing all national interests, and provides common law, morals and trade across the globe?  Make no mistake, this is an experiment. There are no guarantees that it will be successful. History is littered with attempts at organising diverse people into empires, some have lasted a few thousand years, others like communism only a few decades. The EU is an experiment based on multi culturalism. All experiments should, from time to time, be robustly challenged. We should not be afraid to tear it down periodically and re-invent it using the good bits and trying something different with the things that have not worked.

if we do choose this route, then we must be prepared to start influencing the EU and being an active part of this experiment, with our eyes wide open and fully aware of what we are doing and why. We also need to stop pratting about sending joker MEPs, and start trying to knock the EU out of its  squandering gravy train, unaccountable, patronising, mother hen stupidity and turn it into something that might adapt to and survive its first invasion of the super breeders

you also need to look at how easy it is to get the EU to change direction and the likelihood of driving through change. What did Cameron achieve in the months prior to announcing a referendum? In my opinion  It is highly likely that all the issues we have now will still be present in 10 years’ time, along with some new ones pickup up along the way.

Leave:

 The transition process for Exit or Grey will take time, a 20 year term or more given the slow pace of legal change. It will also require strong leadership and smart active selfless people to move us through a transition to a new vision of the UK and the EU. Do such people exist? Would you trust Corbyn and Labour with this task? Cameron is off, so who would replace him? Osbourne? Floppy head? Sturgeon? Are existing politicians up to the job or do we need better people? Maybe there is enough intelligence in the collective houses to hold it all together and move us along, but we would need to pull together as a unit. One thing this referendum has done is to galvanise busy heads like me to take note and want to participate. Maybe there is enough interest in GREY even for the Scots Welsh and Irish to want to participate in a new adventurous union.

An Exit/Grey road is long, has many risks, but as humans, that is what we do, we change, we adapt, we survive and if we don’t try we won’t know. There is just one fly in this ointment that worries me. It smacks of revolution rather than evolution. And revolutions which shake everything up at the same time rarely work. Any transition would have to be gradual, and this is time consuming

Whichever way you vote, dont be afraid. Consider these things with your head and your heart tempered by your capacity for risky adventure, and  choose your vision of our future. This is a pivotal moment that will set our course for 2 decades at least. This is evolution at work. This is your moment. We may end up slightly poorer, busier, more frustrated, competing with our neighbours or those further afield, but hey we will be adapting to the changes around us whatever route we choose, which is what we do best. See you on our chosen path..... Anyone for GREY?

Watch out EU, the Brits are coming to shake things up -well just a bit, maybe after parents evening- what is on TV tonight?

The fact that our debt mountain is so huge and unsustainable and our services are still breaking under the strain means that service costs of free movement are greater than the growth/tax benefits.

If you have lived your formative years in an environment where murder rape, slavery, theft, dishonesty and phobias of other cultures are rife, you need to be educated into western values.

EU Risk Model

riskAllSmall

EU Vision Vs Reality

VisionVsReality

FilesInSpace.com