Cameron in a Corner
EU to UK: Go On, Pay Up, Subsidize the French
show comments
  • Pete

    Very good insight!

  • John Stephens

    Driving the golden goose out of the flock is no better an idea than killing it. But at this point no one should expect better from the Eurocracy.

    • PDX_traveler

      The golden goose?! Ah, if the UK’s relations with, and benefits from, the EU were so one sided, they would have long ago quit, no?
      This is somewhat (yeah, yeah, but of course not quite) like saying North Dakota would like to execute a NoDakExit from the U.S. because it’s currently outperforming the rest of the Union.

      • John Stephens

        More like Texas, which was an independent republic before joining the Union and still has nationalistic outbursts. They’re also not on the best of terms with the national leadership in spite of (or because of) the fact that Texas has the healthiest economy of the several States (North Dakota’s current energy boom notwithstanding).

  • Walter,

    I agree with you up to a point, but, David Cameron is not the innocent party in here, at least in the eye of the EU’s honchos. And the reason is that not a single day pass in here in UK, without having Cameron preening and grand-standing against EU in some fashion or the other. And, in fact, only the other day, he was talking about how he is going to stop the EU internal migration coming to UK, even, if he knows that the free movement of goods, of capital, of people, and of services, are the “four pillars” in which the EU’s internal-market (or the common-market) is based on.

    And, therefore he knows that you can’t breezily abrogate (or annul) one pillar of that system without whole thing coming down crashing, or at least having others within the EU saying they also should be given the same right to “pick-and-choose” which right (of the four rights of pillars) they should excuse themselves from it.

    So, in that sense, what is going on in here in UK (or as we like to call her affectionately as “Blighty”) is a two way kicking-of-the-shin between EU’s bureaucrats and Cameron himself, in which Cameron, in-order to fight against those of his party and in UKIP who are on his right will say all manner of beastly thing about EU, and in return, the EU’s bureaucrats who run the place, will return the favor to him by kicking him back at the his political shin as good as he did to them earlier in the week.

    • RTO Dude

      It sounds like you’re claiming the hardship of bailing out France is offset by the hardship of uncontrolled immigration.

      I’m sorry, but this makes no sense. I’m inclined to believe that Cameron is indeed the innocent party.

  • Why is the West full of so many in positions of leadership, who only want to kick the can down the road to future generations? Wait! Wait! I know! Because fertility across all of Europe (and all of Blue State America (and Japan, Australia, New Zealand…)) is negative; Europeans don’t care enough about the future to populate it, so why NOT kick the can down the road and enjoy it while it lasts? Taking from tomorrow at no pain to your non-existent heirs to fund more lattes & BMWs today? Why not? Really… WHY NOT? That this surprises ANYONE is testament only to a worldview in which demographics are completely ignored by all political parties. And to Western voting franchises that actually allow voting – an act determinative of the future – by those not having kids – hostage TO that future. Can it be fixed? Can we again vote as though we care about the future? Only by reducing the franchise to parents, preferably only those parents paying income taxes – you know, by those adults actually participating in their nation’s economy and future.

    • PDX_traveler

      “…fertility across … blue state America is negative” ?? Brilliant. You may have introduced new BS into the discourse now – ‘the fecund South’ vs. ‘the barren Northeast’, to replace previous versions of BS.

      • Look at demographics. 2010 census, 2008 election: Three blue states had positive fertility: HI, NM, NV. That’s it. All large-population Blue states have negative fertility. BS? no -it’s called “demographics.” Seems as though you should look It up. It’s why they vote as they do – ask any political demographer how a precinct will vote. He’ll say ‘You tell me how many kids there are and I’ll tell you how they will vote.’

        • PDX_traveler

          I see. The moment I have kids, I’m more likely to vote for some half-wit moron waving a yellow flag with a rattlesnake on a stick. Makes sense in some universe of your construction I guess.
          I live in a suburban district, lots of families with kids. No Republicans need apply. Go figure out your sweeping generalities. Sorry, I still call BS

          • That’s the problem in trying to engage liberals in logical conversation. Demographic facts are demographic facts. Whether you believe them or not is as immaterial as your belief in gravity. The fact is that parents vote differently that single adults. The fact is that Liberals have negative fertility globally. The fact is that red state citizens have positive fertility. What you do when you do when you have kids is not relevant – though the Gadsden flag you deride is the only reason you are able to freely spout nonsense, but that’s just normal historical ignorance, without which you couldn’t be a lib, so is expected. And here’s another fact: When you hit 65 you are going to start using up a resource – money in SS accounts – from a pool of workers that liberals have chosen not to replenish. You, and people like you have made SS a non-renewable resources. Your not having positive fertility just means you are perfectly happy to freeload on other people’s kids. You clowns always are yammering about morals – what is more immoral than freeloading on someone else’s kids? But – when you have kids, guess what? You, like most other parents, will decide that lowering the standard of living of YOUR kids in order to raise the unearned standard of living of someone else’s kids is nothing but theft. And then you will begin re-thinking your vote. but to sit there and anecdotally bloviate on what you will do as though it has any influence at all on national demographics is just childish. But, again, you’re a liberal, so that’s part of the show, isn’t it?

          • PDX_traveler

            Boy, you’re sure shoveling it thick and fast, aren’t you?! If we’re going to freely use the words ‘you’ and ‘typical’, try this on – blowhards like you typically overuse words like logic and rationality, only to mask a closed mind full of thoughts from an echo chamber populated with others who think and talk just like you.
            Facts?? You went from talking about some demographic statistics to posing as a political demographic expert who can predict precinct voting patterns. The latter is not a fact, it is your thought projection. BS.
            For another clue, go look at stats on how these states’ balance of payments vis a vis the federal govt. stacks up before you build up your nonsensical deck of cards you call arguments.
            Not worth going on much more, but one last thing – ‘when’ I have kids?? I already have kids. I live in a ‘precinct’ where lots/most people have kids. This doesn’t fit with your mental model of the world? You know, most intelligent people figure this out – don’t just spin BS on the internet or in a bar based on what you read or hear from other folks.
            The words ‘cranky idiot’ somehow come to mind… you know, not unlike those pics of such people walking around with sandwich boards and waving that yellow flag?
            Deal with it.

          • Wow. See what I meant about facts & libs? Overuse “logic” nahhh… the problem is when libs use and pretend they know what it is. Here’s an example: Libs demand that it is logical to vote for Progressive economic policies in order to improve the lot of our citizens. Of course there is not one time in history, in any culture, country or time, in which those policies have done anything other than to degrade living and education standards, all measures of wealth, and constantly have destroyed communities, lives and states. There are NO examples in the historical record of success of liberal policies. But you guys defend them, vote for them and call yourselves “logical.” It’s a laugher. Again – your acceptance of demographic facts is irrelevant to their being facts. But that only marks you as a lib: Rejecting any facts at-odds with your ideology. See, for adults, it’s facts first and then form an ideology around those facts; and if/when the facts change, we think about it and alter our worldview. (This is called “intellectual maturity.”) For Libs, it’s the opposite: You choose your ideology, normally as a teenager when we’re all stupid, ignorant and uninformed, but then Libs NEVER re-evaluate it; they just reject all facts that prove their ideology is junk, and then whine and call names of those who actually THINK. Not sure what any balance of payments has to do with demographics. If you are talking about red states getting more than they give, that’s easy – most military bases are in red states. And, no, I am not pro- our ridiculous DoD budget; we defend the entire West, including nations more than able to pay their own way. No reason exists for us to defend W Europe – if they don’t want to defend themselves, that’s their choice. Didn’t work for Ukraine, but that was their choice, too. If you have kids you may want to consider how much of their future living standards you are stealing to make yourself feel good about yourself today. We have spent $20T on anti-poverty programs since 1964 (that you, doubtless, have voted for), and not moved the poverty rate down even 0.1%. We have pissed away trillions to buy votes for Democrats and to keep the poor, poor. We KNOW those programs don’t work – we’ve been proving it for half-a-century. But libs keep stealing money from the future to pay for them to make themselves feel good. (Besides, the poor vote for Dems, so why not make more of them?) Have you ever looked at the rate of entry of African Americans into the Middle Class BEFORE those policies? It was higher. I’m also always entertained by those calling names and accusing people of getting on the internet all their info. Mostly this happens when they are losing arguments and have no logic, history or policy success to use in argumentation. Recommendation: If you dislike my arguments, go read a bit and come back and refute them with logic and policy success. (You won’t be able to.) But just sitting there typing nonsense and making accusations you can neither prove nor defend is just as I said – immature and childish. Just like a Lib.

          • PDX_traveler

            Okay, I give up – you win. I guess the spendiferous volume of your arguments, if not their weight, has done for me.

  • Kevin

    And what will the EU do when the British just stop paying?

  • Jacksonian_Libertarian

    Once the EU springs a leak by having the UK leave, others will soon follow and the dissolution of the Euro and EU will proceed just as the dominoes fell for the Soviet Union and Warsaw Pact.

  • Andrew Allison

    The UK is putting its house in order and its economy is improving, France has failed to make the necessary reforms, its economy is failing and it is blatantly flouting EU budgetary requirements, ergo, the UK must bail out France! UKIP must be ecstatic.

© The American Interest LLC 2005-2017 About Us Masthead Submissions Advertise Customer Service
We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to and affiliated sites.