David Cameron’s refusal to sign an amendment to the EU financial treaty was likened by one French source to “a man attending a wife-swapping party without his spouse”.
If that’s an apt description, then it’s a good thing he didn’t sign. How typical: a coterie of slippery continentals all fucking each others’ wives while their households crumble around them. Britain, Norway, Sweden and Switzerland are the only ones who apparently think that a bunch of frogs, krauts, wogs and dagoes fucking your wife is not something they’d be into thankyou very much … but they might have a look when the Dutch put it on the internet.
Why would Britain sign a treaty which gives significantly greater control over its financial sector to a cabal of lefty Eurocrats, some of whom who have commented negatively about “Anglo-Saxon free market influence”? Britain has already abrogated control over much of its agricultural policy and its social laws to Europe, to the point where citizens can be extradited to foreign countries on corrupt charges or on accusations of "crimes" which would not even be offences in Britain. Many of its citizens are of the view that their government should be taking some of these powers back, not giving away sovereignty over one of their nation’s few remaining competitive advantages.
The treaty amendments are really a device to transfer as much of London’s financial influence as possible to Paris and Frankfurt anyway. Britain must now be breathing an enormous sigh of relief that it kept the pound. Norway of course would never have been stupid enough to expose its very sensibly accumulated sovereign wealth fund to the slippery, incompetent Eurocrats and the lazy, corrupt economies they wish to subsidise.
One of the new financial treaty proposals is that:
To prevent excessive deficits, countries in the treaty will have to submit their national budgets to the European Commission, the executive body of the EU, which will have the power to send them back for revision.
Umm … I thought part of the original agreement when creating the Euro was that member countries would limit deficits to within a certain percentage of GDP. So are they now saying that this rule will actually be enforced?
What has happened until now? Was a country’s internal audit simply believed? Tell me which of these governments’ word you would take at face value: Greece, Italy, Spain, Portugal, Estonia.
Countries were meant to be properly audited prior to being allowed to join the Eurozone. Greece has clearly obtained its membership by fraud. An auditor would have to be completely incompetent not to pick up Greece’s debt problems when it joined the Euro in 2000 – 01. They have not suddenly materialised in the last 10 years. This then leads to the conclusion that the problems were known, but covered up for political reasons; all the more reason for Britain to stay out of this corrupt system.
It is typical of the left’s dishonesty to call what is happening in Europe a crisis of capitalism. The crisis is the financial contagion caused by imposing a common currency and set of fiscal rules on culturally and economically disparate countries. If countries like Greece had not been allowed to join the Euro, they could have defaulted as has happened historically. Lenders would have taken losses, but there would have been no need for bailouts and the consequent debt contagion and massive increase in instability.
The Eurozone is an invention of academic, socialist technocrats, who usually call themselves Social Democrats or similar. It is the forced linking in pursuit of political ideology of parts of the European economy which should never have been joined, coupled with the cover ups of fraudulent state accounting to achieve these political ends which is overwhelmingly the driver of the severity of the current European problems.
“Free market” economic policies do not imply the absence of regulation any more than a free and open society implies the absence of laws. Regulation is needed to ensure access to market information, as well as to guard against anti-market activity such as pricing below cost to strangle a smaller competitor or criminal activity such as collusion and other forms of market manipulation.
The scale of Europe’s financial problems is not a crisis of free market economics: it is a crisis of technocratic socialism and its egregious rule making enterprise.
No comments:
Post a Comment