Originally posted by northernladyuk
View Post
- Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
- Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!
EU dissent gathers pace
Collapse
X
-
Bear in mind that the Economist is a fanatically pro-EU rag, and all their past EU-related predictions and urgings have been hopelessly and hilariously wrong (e.g. We MUST join ERM, we MUST join the Euro, etc etc ...)Work in the public sector? Read the IR35 FAQ here -
Excellent work.Originally posted by OwlHoot View PostBear in mind that the Economist is a fanatically pro-EU rag, and all their past EU-related predictions and urgings have been hopelessly and hilariously wrong (e.g. We MUST join ERM, we MUST join the Euro, etc etc ...)
For the record: The Economist was cautious about Britain joining the euro | The Economist
For the record
The Economist was cautious about Britain joining the euro
May 25th 2016, 10:14 BY C.W. | LONDON
Timekeeper
I WAS asked yesterday in a radio interview about the Treasury's report, published on Monday, which predicted a sharp recession if Britain votes to leave the EU. My opponent in that debate dismissed my view on the grounds that The Economist had advocated Britain joining the euro back in the late 1990s and early 2000s. Of course this sort of argument is a red herring (if you're wrong about one thing does it definitely mean that you're wrong about something else?), but it's worth pointing out for the record that we were sceptical about the prospect of Britain joining.
First we have long been sceptical about the idea of the euro for any country. In a special report in 1998 we argued that "the European economics are ill-preared for the euro" and that "Europe does not make an ideal currency area". Our hope back then was that, with a single currency, economies like Italy, Spain and the rest would be forced to implement structural reforms that made their economies more competitive. (Of course this did not happen to the extent that it was required.)
Then, on Britain, we did do a survey of 164 economists in 1999 which found that two-thirds were in favour of joining. However, we consistently expressed scepticism about the wisdom of the project. For instance, we worried in 2002 about the impact on Britain's economy of the "stability pact", which "if Britain were to join the euro, say in 2004...would become highly relevant." The stability pact puts limits on the size of budget deficits. But we remarked in that article that "Britain's public infrastructure is exceptionally run-down" and while a policy of reducing public debt "may be legitimate for the EU as a whole" it would not be for Britain.
Advertisement
In a 2003 article, we did say that the "economic benefits of Britain's adopting the euro would most likely outweigh the economic drawbacks". But, this was only on the condition that the "inept Stability and Growth Pact should be improved, preferably to the point where it ceases to exist."
So the idea that The Economist has been slavishly pro-euro from the off is just not true.Comment
-
The Economist is terrible publication full of EU funded lies, so much unlike Daily Mail, which is the golden standard of TruthOriginally posted by OwlHoot View PostBear in mind that the Economist is a fanatically pro-EU rag, and all their past EU-related predictions and urgings have been hopelessly and hilariously wrong (e.g. We MUST join ERM, we MUST join the Euro, etc etc ...)
Comment
-
Unfortunately us playing by the rules is what got us into so much difficulty with the EU. The other Nations just ignore them.Those who play chess well know how to forecast next few moves.Comment
-
Originally posted by AtW View PostThose who play chess well know how to forecast next few moves.
What does HMG playing, polo or croquet?
Comment
-
Comment
-
Comment
-
Nemo iudex in causa suaOriginally posted by northernladyuk View PostWork in the public sector? Read the IR35 FAQ hereComment
-
You cast a wild allegation, and I offered a rebuttal, but you have nothing to say on that it seems.Originally posted by OwlHoot View Post
However, not to worry because: it's going to be a jolly red, white and blue Brexit, all washed down with lashings of ginger beer!Comment
-
And that's how folks alternative facts are born...Originally posted by OwlHoot View PostAt last, a common sense indisputable fact about the EU, and from AtW of all people!
Comment
- Home
- News & Features
- First Timers
- IR35 / S660 / BN66
- Employee Benefit Trusts
- Agency Workers Regulations
- MSC Legislation
- Limited Companies
- Dividends
- Umbrella Company
- VAT / Flat Rate VAT
- Job News & Guides
- Money News & Guides
- Guide to Contracts
- Successful Contracting
- Contracting Overseas
- Contractor Calculators
- MVL
- Contractor Expenses
Advertisers
Contractor Services
CUK News
- Business expenses: What IT contractors can and cannot claim from HMRC Jan 30 08:44
- April’s umbrella PAYE risk: how contractors’ end-clients are prepping Jan 29 05:45
- How EV tax changes of 2025-2028 add up for contractor limited company directors Jan 28 08:11
- Under the terms he was shackled by, Ray McCann’s Loan Charge Review probably is a fair resolution Jan 27 08:41
- Contractors, a £25million crackdown on rogue company directors is coming Jan 26 05:02
- How to run a contractor limited company — efficiently. Part one: software Jan 22 23:31
- Forget February as an MSC contractor seeking clarity, and maybe forget fairness altogether Jan 22 19:57
- What contractors should take from Honest Payroll Ltd’s failure Jan 21 07:05
- HMRC tax avoidance list ‘proves promoters’ nothing-to-lose mentality’ Jan 20 09:17
- Digital ID won’t be required for Right To Work, but more compulsion looms Jan 19 07:41

Comment