DER SPIEGEL ON UK EU MEMBERSHIP: “Virtually impossible to find hard proof of any net benefit.”

AND SOROS SAYS EURO ‘Will destroy European Union”

daveeuDodgy Dave wins a 1938 déja vu

Rarely can the major UK press titles have been in greater concert than they are today on the EU budget ‘victory’ delivered by David Cameron. The coverage represents, once again, the triumph of rhetoric and hack idleness over facts.

‘Victory for David Cameron as EU budget faces cuts for first time’ (Telegraph). ‘On the brink of an historic agreement: EU leaders poised to cut budget by £30bn’ (Independent). ‘Cameron closes in on EU budget victory’ (Mail). ‘On the brink of an historic agreement: EU leaders poised to cut budget by £30bn’ (Guardian). ‘David Cameron victorious as EU is forced to make cuts for the first time in its history’ (Express). ‘Le Sulk: Hollands stands up Cameron as he faces defeat’ (Sun). ”He’s a dirty rat but I hate her even more’: Newly-wed husband cheats with his wife’s best friend’. (Mirror). That’ll be Britain’s last bastion of left-wing politics the Mirror, then.

spiegtitanicBut Germany’s leading political magazine Der Spiegel takes a different view. In today’s online edition, it features a piece about what the European Union ‘delivers’ t0 Britain. This is the summary of its conclusions:

‘In 2011, [the UK] paid some €7.3 billion more into EU coffers than it received back in the form of structural aid….Britain is debating whether membership in the bloc makes any economic sense. Perhaps surprisingly, it’s virtually impossible to find hard proof of any net benefit.’

It may be a surprise to the vast majority of Germans, but for those of us who regularly do the maths (and I’m no UKipper by the way) it is in that region between obvious and certainty. The €7.3 billion ‘gap’ referred to by Spiegel above represents only a fraction of the real net cost: our ‘membership’ fees plus trade gap with the EU add up to an eye-rolling €118 billion per annum. Our saving from this deal is €500 million….one sixth of our monthly trade deficit, and under 1% of the total statutory cost of being in the European Union.

sorosThe use of ‘contributions’ as a yardstick is little more than classic europhile spin: we are a trading nation, and successful traders judge business worth based on a cost/benefit analysis. There is no positive benefit to us staying in the EU whatsoever. But this only represents the situation today. Read what George Soros (left) had to say about the future he sees for our European partners on Dutch Radio this week:

“I am terribly concerned about the euro potentially destroying the EU. There is a real danger that the solution to the financial problem creates a really profound political problem….

“Germany needs to realise that the policy it impose on the euroarea – the austerity programme – is counter-productive. It cannot actually succeed. At the moment they [the South] is being pushed – unwittingly, not with bad intentions, but the effect is that they are being pushed into a long lasting depression and that is what is happening to Europe. And it may last more than a decade, in fact it could become permanent, until the pain is so big that eventually there may be a rebellion, a rejection of the EU, and that would then be the destruction of the EU, which is a terribly heavy price to maintain to preserve the euro, which is meant to be just a servant of the EU….

“[The euro] could last quite a long time, the same way as the Soviet Union, which was a very bad arrangement, lasted for 70 years. However, I think that eventually, it is bound to break up the European Union. The longer it will take, and it may take generations, those will be lost in terms of political freedom and economic prosperity. The solution is to me a terrible tragedy for the EU. And it΄s happening to the most developed open society in the world….”

George always has an agenda. But I find it very hard to argue with that view.

The only way to analyse this ‘deal’ is in the context of total potential damage to the UK in remaining EU members. On that basis, it is even worse than a re-run of 1938. The shameful willingness to write off ClubMed is no different in either style or substance to the alacrity with which Britain fed Czechoslovakia to the Nazis at Berchtesgarden. The cost in lives to liberate Europe afterwards was horrendous; and the Czechs themselves further paid for it with another forty years under Moscow after the War.

But the material cost of being legally bound to a superstate with a toxic currency and a fascist mindset is incalculable. This leering, crushing, unaudited, multiply law-breaking leviathan run out of Brussels-am-Berlin will never, ever give up its commitment to a single currency. The euro is inflammable fiat paper: it has done nothing but harm to every member State except Germany since its inception….and will swamp the Germans if it is allowed to run its maverick course.

I have no idea what comes below Pyrrhic in terms of victory, but the one being proclaimed for Cameron today is it. And the MSM are, as usual, goosestepping in perfect order with the lunatics in this suicidal battle for brainless hegemony. May they stand forever condemned for so doing.

Earlier at The Slog: Why this deal means nothing good

 

 

78 thoughts on “DER SPIEGEL ON UK EU MEMBERSHIP: “Virtually impossible to find hard proof of any net benefit.”

  1. But did not Soros stand up at Davos recently & say that the Euro crisis was being solved & Europe was saved, thereby talking up the market? Since then, he is reported to have dumped many of his European holdings.
    More markets manipulation by Soros?

  2. ‘This leering, crushing, unaudited, multiply law-breaking leviathan run out of Brussels-am-Berlin will never, ever give up its commitment to a single currency.’
    The only thing that will stop the euro,is blood, lots of blood, on the streets of Europe.

    • It’s not my intention to start a debate about the pros and cons of the days of the Raj, but when we look at the British Empire – and the Roman Empire, too – whilst not necessarily benign, they at least brought something to the table, delivering order and infrastructure to the subject nations. These empires crumbled in time, of course. All things must pass.
      The malignant empires on the other hand (USSR, Fascist Germany, Spain, Italy) being all take and no give, lasted mere decades. That is our hope, that the EU implodes. If you’re out there somewhere, God, make it soon, please.

    • They are paying for it now, they just don’t know it yet. Murky is another manipulator when it comes to keeping the German public informed, she has lied to them consistently for a long time now.

  3. George was declaring the EU to be saved and the euro a strong bet when he was in Davos a couple of weeks ago. So its just an old fashioned “pump and dump” from the Destroyer of Worlds?

  4. My German colleague, Horst Teubert of http://www.german-foreign-policy.com made an excellent speech a few years ago in the House of Commons, entitled “Germany’s Bid for Great Power Status through the EU”. It is available in the European Voices section of http://www.freenations.freeuk.com.
    They are not giving up any of the aims he sets out and the euro is a prime instrument of this bid for power.

    There is a noticeable continuity of mindset in the German political class. Before WWI my great uncle was a multilingual sales agent in Europe who was very fond of “good old Germany” where he made many friends. He told me of the build up of aggressive sentiment from around 1905. Bookshops, he said were full of titles like “Weltmacht Oder Niedergang” ( World Power or Downfall ). Whilst today’s chosen means are different, the Will to Power is very similar and should not be underrated.

    • Never underrate a German. They have a treaty with Poland that states they will never make a claim on what were the old Eastern provinces.

      So instead individual Germans are all busily buying it instead.

      Mind you, the Poles do nicely out of the proximity. Half the lorries on the Autobahn seem to come from Poland these days. Must be making a fortune.

      Now Germany did achieve Weltmacht, and has retained it despite losing two wars in doing so. This is not domination, it is the status of dining at the top table. My question is why did America help Germany so much through all those years?

      • I would say it was to continue making money after the armaments sales dried up mid-1945. There was also an excuse to get this money-making past the politicians, that of keeping the West Germans out of the Russian orbit.

        THe German attitude is permanent Wletmacht, not because they are in any way inherently Darksiders, it’s just that they see how other people do things and view it with mild contempt, seeing the German way as better. The trouble is, the German way normally is more efficient than most other nations except the Swiss, and they’re virtually kith-and-kin, so it’s a self-fulfilling prophecy.

      • Germans and the US did well with the new budget. Of the 700 or so billion euro that is left for distribution 106 billion goes to Poland. I bet someones left testicle that a huge share of that money flows right back to german and american industries(and a couple of dutch firms).

  5. Pingback: John Ward – Der Spiegel On UK EU Membership: “Virutally Impossible To Find Hard Proof Of Any Net Benefit.” – And Soros Says EURO ‘Will Destroy European Union’ -8 February 2013 | Lucas 2012 Infos

    • Chamberlain was scared of other world powers too, and did see the agreement in Germany as a victory. He had just achieved a similar one with the US.

      You can say it was all bunkum, in the turmoil of the 30s nobody knew what was going on. It was the political version of today’s economic crisis. And look how well Britain is handling that! Economic health in our time, anybody? Today, British pols are running around as scared of the economics as they were scared of imaginary enemies in the 30s.

      • I feel sorry for Chamberlain, he was faced with a major dilemma, war with Germany or war with Japan. Britain by the 30′s could not hope to survive both. With an isolationist, even hostile US and a declining economy we had to pick our battles and he decided that Hitler however distateful was easier to deal with than Hirohito.

        That we ended up fighting both and effectively destroyed ourselves as a top table power in the process (along with self-inflicted wounds such as a bottomless pit of welfare, etc in the post war years as we basked in the false glory of being a ‘victor’)

      • I hadn’t heard the Japan angle before. It was the US that had Chamberlain spooked.

        A war with Japan – given their presence in Manchuria and Korea – would have been extremely difficult. The Russian attempt to stop Japan entering Korea failed wholeheartedly, and should have served as an object lesson to the Brits.

      • You can see the strategic slant that the UK was adopting by 1935, the lions share of the initial re-armament went to the Royal Navy (and can be timed down to the week/day with the ordering of 6 inch guns to arm 30 plus cruisers in early 1935) as it would be that service which would have to be ready to fight the Japanese.

        Only later on around 1937/38 were resources directed to the Army/RAF and probably contributed to the issues we had early in the war when confronting a land based Wehrmacht/Luftwaffe.

        The only consolation was the heavily re-armed Navy prevented a German Army getting across the channel in one piece (irrespective of the outcome of the Battle of Britain)

  6. I have always favoured a close association within Europe but without a full federal structure much desired by the elite.

    The members of the European Parliament are third rate at best and in general, like many in the European Commission (Barroso, Ashton, …), lightweight in national politics. .

    Guido has an item on one of their latest EP proposals.

    Labour Ally Proposes Secret EU Budget Vote
    http://order-order.com/2013/02/08/labour-ally-proposes-secret-eu-budget-vote/

  7. I’m confused [a common state nowadays] You have frequently labelled the EU fascists several times and at the same time implied they are as near to communist as possible to get without actually being.so.
    Are you using the word metaphorically? I say this because even old George thought it was misused/overused so I’m in good company for my confusion.
    George Orwell
    “It would seem that, as used, the word ‘Fascism’ is almost entirely meaningless. In conversation, of course, it is used even more wildly than in print. I have heard it applied to farmers, shopkeepers, Social Credit, corporal punishment, fox hunting, bullfighting, the 1922 Committee, the 1941 Committee, Kipling, Gandhi, Chiang Kai-Shek, homosexuality, Priestley’s broadcasts, Youth Hostels, astrology, women, dogs and I do not know what else.”

    • Your confusion results from the commonplace misapplication of these terms. Look up ‘NSDAP’ on Wikipedia and see how the Nazis described themselves. Hitler and Stalin; two cheeks of the same @***.

    • Fascism is a variant of Socialism. Think of it as a splinter of a church. That was why they (Fascists and Socialists) hated each other so much.

    • Fascist/communist, the end result for the man on the street is terror and effective slavery irrespective of which route it comes from. I have always liked to point out to my more left leaning friends that the Nazis’s and Mussolini’s fascists all have roots in socialism (albeit a nationalistic version).

      Behind all of them is the corporate ‘money power’ which Lincoln and others spoke of, I used to think this was all conspiracy theory territory the past few years have dispelled this as a myth.

      • What a bunch of toss. Reminds me of those Christians who say “Stalin was an atheist, therefore atheism is evil” (they also pretend Hitler wasn’t a catholic, but that’s another story). Cyanide contains carbon, so carbon must be bad, right?

        Yes, fascism is usually described as containing elements of socialism, so what? Got news for you… it doesn’t necessarily make socialism bad.

        And anyway, evil dictators usually aren’t fascists. Pinochet and Baby Doc, for example, were good little capitalists, but were quite happy to sanction mass murder and torture to further their aims.

  8. The true test of Cameron’s so-called ‘success’ would be to list the UK’s annual cash contributions to the EU for each year from now until the end of the budget period.
    Guess what ? It will show a year-on-year increase.
    Guess what ? They won’t publish it.
    Success ?

  9. If you think about it looks like one of history’s ironies that the EU began its march towards a superstate at exactly the moment its old eastern enemy ceased to exist.The disintegration of the Stalinist empire was the best thing that could happened for its people but ironically looks as the EU has started a new Bolshevik experiment for its people.How is it possible that through out the history we endure so many stupid leaders everywhere in the world?

  10. From the horse’s mouth :

    “Fascism should more appropriately be called Corporatism because it is a merger of state and corporate power”.
    Mussolini.

  11. The current discussion regarding the EU budget is a convenient distractor for the politicians since it diverts attention from the (additional) direct costs of EU regulations on the UK.

  12. In the absence of Austerity, Med-club would return to its loans-addiction,
    where the plutocracy drinks most of the money and leaves the bill to the working class. The solution needs to comprise these 3:
    1. Austerity – which is a curfew on new loans.
    2. Property Tax.
    3. Inheritance Tax.
    The latter 2 are intended to force the plutocracy to repay its loot.

  13. With regard to your opening para on the press/Cameron and the inaccuracies about victory and done deals, I agree. To me, Cameron appears disingenuous, and many newspaper claims wildly inaccurate. Cameron has come home stating that the deal is done. No it is not. Only the first part of the whole procedure has taken place. There is a two pronged process for approving the EU budget and that involves firstly the Council of Europe, and secondly the European Parliament. We have only passed the first hurdle, and now the proposal by the Council of Europe has to be put before the European Parliament and voted on. Then, and only then, can the EU budget proposals be finalised, and talk of victory and done deals be of any worth.
    The latest information is that Schulz and some colleagues are going to use a little known procedure to request that the MEPs have a secret vote. There are enough animosities amongst the MEPs, as well as the hostility to the proposed settlement from those MEPs who will not envisage a budget reduction at any price, to ensure that certainty is not the order of the day.
    Who knows how this will end, but Cameron has certainly not secured a reduction in the budget yet. That all depends on the European Parliament vote, and initial indications are not at all favourable. However, the EP, as with all things to do with the EU, is unpredictable, so we are in the waiting game stage where political alliances are quickly being forged, and deals being done behind closed doors.

    What is more important at the moment is that David Cameron has come home with the prospect of our contributions to the EU increasing significantly rather than decreasing. It really doesn’t matter whose fault that is now: the UK has to face up to the fact that yet again we are going to have to pay up even more to the EU, budget cut or not. Can we afford it?

    Farage, by contrast, was absolutely right and he gave the information straight. He doesn’t talk about done deals, as he knows the deal has not been done. What he focuses on is the key issue, that we will have to increase the UK’s contribution to the EU coffers. The central question is therefore can we afford it? I think not.

  14. You should have read Bernard Connolly’s book ‘The Rotten Heart of Europe’. In his analysis of the ERM (that is what the book is about) he laid bare why Monetary Union would turn out to be a disaster – something we can all clearly see. I would suggest you look on Amazon where you can read a new preface to the 2012 edition. It is good that this very clever book has at long last been reprinted.

    • That whole devaluing currency thing has always baffled me. How can a currency’s value be set by a government? Surely a currency is worth what it’s worth, i.e. what it’s worth on the open forex market against other currencies, regardless of what the government of the country of origin of that currency would ideally like it to be valued at for domestic economic/fiscal reasons.

      Can somebody please explain? Is it a case of just deliberately printing lots and lots more notes to dilute the purchasing power of the currency?

  15. Don’t be fooled by your David Cameron.
    As I point out in my high level financial circle briefings …
    His gameplan is simple…..to oust France away from Germany so that you Britishers can sit as the right hand man of the powerhouse of Europe. The benefits would be substantial – just look at how France has benefited over the past decades – a nation of untrustworthy country bumkins hoisted to the forefront of geopolitical prominence by German sponsorship.
    Referendum in five years….yes, when the new relationship has been consumated, and the British economy is benefiting nicely ……
    This is a ruse set to succeed, and there are once in a lifetime investment opportunities not to be missed at this very moment.

      • Agreed.
        Germany needs us as much as we need them. Quite a formidable partnership in the making. Dr.Carney knows how to kindle the growth that will set the UK back on it’s feet.

  16. I agree with many of the comments above, that the exact sum ‘saved’ is pretty irrelevant when it comes to any sort of European Budget. Spin doctors and statisticians can really make the numbers say whatever suits a particular politician’s or MSM’s agenda.

    The sea change here is Germany and the UK, as two of the largest contributors. starting to work together to reign in the Sprouts Credit Card. If I were a Frenchman this morning, I would be very concerned about having a President whose mindset is in the role of ‘Champion of the Poor’ over that of being the ‘Third Great European Economic Power’. I think that Mr Hollande should be very careful what he wishes for.

    I also think that the European Parliament would be very foolish to bounce this budget as neither Cameron or Geli have an electorate who will stand for such nonsense and Martin Shulz does not yet seem to comprehend the changes in alliances happening in the EU. If Geli does gets re-elected, my guess is that, pretty quickly, she will want to tear up a lot of the EU rule book (in Germany’s favour) ‘To save the Euro’ and Mr Cameron may find himself riding that particular Tiger long before any 2015 UK elections, negotiations on his new terms and subsequent possible referendums here.

    • Well Graham D, I trust Mr. Schulz has read your comments and is having a deep think about his statement that the European Parliament is to veto the budget. Hmmmm….let me just check his website…Nope, the veto is still on…but then whoever outside an MEP and their hangers-on comprehend anything going on outside their own feeding trough?

  17. Pingback: THE SATURDAY ESSAY: What good are you? | The Slog. 3-D bollocks deconstruction

  18. Absolutely. It is difficult to see what kind of ‘victory’ it is when we end up paying more to the EU, and therefore an even higher proportion of the total than we did before. Why are we paying more than most eurozone countries?

  19. I am mystified how Cameron goes to the EU, commits us to paying more money, and has the effrontery to call it a success. ok so the EU budget overall may be less so we are paying an even higher proportion of it……in my book I look at the net price not the hiked up pre discount puff……

  20. I could turn out tb be a good thing, over the medium term; that the MSM are all saying the same thing. People will eventually/quickly realise that the MSM are all lying. Many have already realised this.
    So, when the ‘Euro political-economic crisis’ becomes a ‘Euro civil order’ crisis it will be harder for the MSM to tell lies that people are willing to accept.
    It’s a dark analysis I know but there is nothing else for it…..let them continue to lie and lie until even Lab/Con voting BBC News viewers know it’s all false.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s