Cyprus-Forum.com

[Tim Drayton]

The 'EU' are now looking into charging the British a fee to avoid having to apply for a visa. They are copying the US line as it will limit a stay in the EU to just 90 days. Once again, I think that is not very smart thinking! What effect will this have on tourism, which is mainly to the poorer states of the EU like Cyprus, Greece, Spain, Italy etc.?

blimy you posted something worth reading, ...

Yet this comes from the same man who in this very thread (page 115) said a few days ago, berating contributors to a call-in programme for their so-called ignorance over the issues surrounding the UK's exit from the EU: "Some of the responses in the interviews, which have been on all day so far, were incredibly ignorant of facts! Such as UK citizens would no longer be able to go for holidays in EU countries or enter the EU without a Visa; they would no longer be able to go to European countries to study!"

[Paphitis]

Now, if every man and their dog are able to negotiate a FTA with the EU, including USA and Australia, there is no reason why the UK will not have a FTA.

Yes, but that is not exactly the point. The devil is in the detail. There will certainly be some kind of trade deal between the UK and the EU, but how advantageous for the UK will its terms be? I think it is totally nuts for a country the size of the UK (and let's face it - in the modern world only a few countries can exercise full sovereignty in the world and I am afraid that the UK is not one of them) to walk out of the largest trade block in the world that is on its own doorstep.

That is a real shame to think that way Tim.

Just to clarify, I believe that in the world today, only the USA, Russia and China can exercise full sovereignty. Interestingly, even the first two are in trade blocks. It's the Zeitgeist.

All 3 of these countries are in trade blocks among themselves. It's all about free trade.

What about Japan?

You need to provide examples as to why Britain can't exercise its sovereignty. I haven't seen anything that tells me they are anything but sovereign. This thing that everyone is an American Poodle held by many people on a superficial basis because x, y, z nation joined the USA to fight ISIL or the Iraq War in 2003 must really stop. Each country makes its own decision. And wouldn't you expect Britain to join the fight against ISIL? I would.

But there are forces at play. To think there are none is delusional. Britain and the USA are EXTREMELY close. In fact, 5 countries are pretty much exchanging almost everything in terms of intelligence sharing and gathering.

There are also Defence Treaties at play here - NATO and ANZUS etc

We expect the Americans to come to our aid if necessary. Well there is a price to pay for this because we can't just expect that kind of commitment from them for nothing. Britain has its interests as does Australia, Canada, NZ and so on. And an integral part of that is our alliance to the Americans.

For this reason there are obligations that the Americans expect in order for them to pick up the tab.

Such as: 2% of GDP on arms, intelligence sharing, bases, and of course you are probably expected to join the Americans in their wars with other countries but only within reason.

For instance, if there is a war with North Korea, then its all in - NATO and ANZUS and EU. We can't get out of it.

But should America decide to illegally invade Mexico or something, then I don't think so. Let's hope Trump loses.

[Tim Drayton]

I just noticed this from above:

"which is mainly to the poorer states of the EU like Cyprus, Greece, Spain, Italy etc.?"

Things may be pretty dire up in Vouni for all I know, but Cyprus isn't poor.



And that is even with a near total collapse of the banking system!

[Tim Drayton]

The FTSE has the largest market capitalization in the EU.

Yes, you are right. On the other hand, if you look at the market capitalisation of the German stockmarket, this accurately reflects the strength of that country's economy because the companies quoted on it are almost exclusively domestic. This is not the case with London, where huge multinationals that choose to be quoted in London because it is a major global market contribute to a large portion of that market capitalisation, even if they do very little business or have few assets in the UK. If London loses its status as one of the leading financial centres, those companies can easily decide to be quoted elsewhere. If that happens, all of the expert human resources in the city can easily get up and move to where the action is, too.

[Paphitis]

If you leave a club then you lose all the benefits that you enjoyed as a member.

Sure! Britain knows it will lose many things but it sees that as advantageous. For instance, it won't need to abide by any of the rules from the EUstasi bureaucratic machine. It can once again, make its own laws instead. That's a plus.

But will they remove all the benefits? I don't think so.

Free Trad will still be in place in all likelihood. Free movement is also likely to still remain. I would be amazed if it is not.

[Paphitis]

The FTSE has the largest market capitalization in the EU.

Yes, you are right. On the other hand, if you look at the market capitalisation of the German stockmarket, this accurately reflects the strength of that country's economy because the companies quoted on it are almost exclusively domestic. This is not the case with London, where huge multinationals that choose to be quoted in London because it is a major global market contribute to a large portion of that market capitalisation, even if they do very little business or have few assets in the UK. If London loses its status as one of the leading financial centres, those companies can easily decide to be quoted elsewhere. If that happens, all of the expert human resources in the city can easily get up and move to where the action is, too.

Yes well the Germans are certainly nowhere near behind the UK. They are a strong and very rich country. With a lot of great manufacturing and fantasic car industry.

Not that the Brits are any slouches either - Rolls Royce, Bentley, Aston Martins, Maclaren, Lotus, Jaguar, Landrover/Range-rover

It's hard to know exactly who owns which companies anywhere really. If you break each company down (even Mercedes benz) you will find so many investors from around the globe and from so many countries.

What matters is where they pay tax.

[Robin Hood]

TD:

If you leave a club then you lose all the benefits that you enjoyed as a member.

I beg to differ!

If you join a club under one set of rules and a self appointed ‘Committee’, unelected by the lay members (The People of Europe), decide to change or add to the rules, to suit their own Grand Plan, then you should have every right to reject the directives of ‘The Committee’ and continue your membership under the same agreed terms you joined under. You just don’t sit at the top table anymore.

The UK has tried for years to influence the direction of the EU away from being a Federal State, acting from inside as a member, all to no avail. Federalism plain does not work. The Federal Jugger-naught powers of Germany and France plough on, riding rough shod over the wishes of the people of other member States, by destroying their Sovereignty bit-by-bit and taking away their right to make decisions within the framework of a Union of States to suit their own specific needs. One size does not fit all!

If a Federation does not work in the US, why should it work in Europe. You cannot have a Federation of States where they use a single currency, when they have such diversified economies and incomes, without the wealthier states subsidising the poorer states. In the US you have wealthy states and poor states, some States have even filed for bankruptcy I believe? Is that not what is coming to the fore in their current presidential elections, the very obvious divisions between rich and poor states, rich and poor people? Even Texas has a large percentage of the population that want to break from the ‘United’ concept.

It will be the spite, the arrogance and the nastiness of the ‘EU’s Committee’, not the other members, that will make this an unpleasant divorce process (if they can) not the UK. This will do them no good at all in the long run as the other member states will look at the bullying and spite and say to themselves ‘This is what these bastards will do to us if we dare to cross them ..... time to start looking after our own interests.’

From little acorns, mighty oaks grow .......... maybe out of the UK’s exit from the Federalism that the EU Commission is intent upon, a new EEC of ex-EU member states will immerge that will be based on mutually beneficial trade agreements not a political agenda for the benefit of the few?

IMO: Those that trumpet ’EUROPA’ and ridicule the UK at every opportunity ........the One State, One Parliament, One Constitution and One Currency proponents, are in for a bit of a shock!

[Tim Drayton]

You need to provide examples as to why Britain can't exercise its sovereignty. I haven't seen anything that tells me they are anything but sovereign.

Let's be careful please, because I am saying that most states in the world have limited sovereignty, which does not mean they exercise no sovereignty at all. You will find that these are mainstream ideas in the world of political science. People may imagine that the nation state and nationalism have always been around. In fact, it is generally accepted that the nation state was ushered in be the Peace Treaty of Westphalia (1648) and it only gradually came into being throughout the world in the second half of the last century - the Austro-Hungarian empire only finally collapsed into nation states in 1918, Cyprus only ceased to be a British colony in 1960 to become a nation state. The whole of human history is in a consant state of flux and no type of structure is permanent. The trend we see starting now is towards supranational formations, such as that represented by the EU. The core six original members of the European Coal and Steel Community are committed to the process of integration that this gave rise to, and even if the EU is reduced to these commited, core members it will still survive. It's the Zeitgeist, stupid.

I really wish I had more time to go into this, but I got up at the crack of dawn today because I have a shedload of work to do, and it is already nearly 8 o' clock. A couple of dozen euro have just been shaved off Cyprus' EU thanks to this. I know it is a cop out, because you can find something on the internet to support every opinion, but I will just have to leave it at this for now:

Wikileaks: Tories confirm UK as America's poodle (03Dec10)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wUC3HNDymec

Thanks for injecting some adult debate into this thread, by the way.

[Tim Drayton]

If you join a club under one set of rules and a self appointed ‘Committee’, unelected by the lay members (The People of Europe), decide to change or add to the rules, to suit their own Grand Plan, then you should have every right to reject the directives of ‘The Committee’ and continue your membership under the same agreed terms you joined under. You just don’t sit at the top table anymore.

So let's get this straight. I am a smoker and I join a club that has no smoking ban in the club room. At the club's general meeting there is a motion proposing a smoking ban in the club room. The motion is passed by majority vote, although I was one of those who voted against. Does this mean I am entitled to flout the smoking ban and continue to smoke in the club room?

[Robin Hood]

Paphitis:

Free movement is also likely to still remain.

I agree with you but ‘extremists’ see ‘Free Movement’ as being uncontrolled and unlimited, with no member state having the right to make their own decision as to who they want and who they don’t want. We have seen over the last few months what that can lead to!