The Brexit joke

We live in our little garden: as long as it’s green everything is more or less quite good. Right? Or maybe (also) Great Britain’s garden needs someone else to take better care of. Britons are debating whether to stay in or leave the EU at a membership referendum: will their garden be greener or not after leaving? Do we have to worry? Will they leave the EU? In my view the answers to all these questions is no. Anyway the correct phrasing will be: ”Should the UK remain a member of the EU or leave the EU?”

Wherefore, in spite of current opinion polls, when Britain will start seriously debating the costs and benefits of leaving the EU, will also realize that a Brexit implicate immense economic costs. Follow the money and you’re seldom mistaken when trying to understand what’s going on. The EU, with a GDP of $18,000 bn, is the biggest economy in the world. Britain is highly specialized in services (law, media, architecture, research, accountancy, insurance, asset management, banks, hedge funds, tourism, etc.) and all those service businesses would be forced to transfer their jobs outside, to Paris, Frankfurt, Dublin. Or…. Edinburgh (if you know what I mean). In the end a Brexit would even lead to a loss of political sovereignty for Britain. Scotland might join the EU. Let’s not even count goods: 90% of UK’s trade with Europe is in goods. There are so many opinions on this issue, but no concrete alternative to EU membership. There’s only one thing certain in case of a Brexit: uncertainty, the unknown.
Anyway, what’s going on out there, outside our bigger garden? A mix of factors combined has revealed us an entire new world, waking us up (someone is still sleeping). Too many factors, actually: hacking wars, terrorists, ISIS, climate change, cybercriminals, economies kept alive with a wash of easy money, richer getting richer but the middle class disappearing, levels of pollution never seen before and so on and on. To summarize it in one concept: 25 percent of us won’t be better off than our parents: this is scaring us because we all want to feel safe, we all want financial security, nobody likes uncertainty. Also because an “increasingly-diminishingly” number of workers will have to pay for migrants’ benefits (the main cause of current EU problems, emotional rather than purely economic, but nevertheless the main), and most don’t consider this right. It’s so easy to be an Eurosceptic, isn’t it?

Luckily I’m a simple man with simple answers: all leaders of 28 members know that the easiest way to lose elections is destroying your own industries. Again…follow the money. Besides there would be the risk of others following the British example breaking up the EU, and most probably the remaining 27 leaders will choose to make Brexit as painful as possible, to discourage similar actions in future. Because in my view an actual Brexit would trigger the disintegration of the EU.
Technological and economic pressures are unprecedented, so to get a decent job requires more and more technical skills, complicating everything. Exceptionally hypocrite and stupid politicians (NO names, please: really not needed) are promising to bring back the golden era…but it’s not that easy. Yet so many of us are buying it. But it’s only when you see the precipice in front, you start braking/breaking and questioning. It’s only before voting you really wonder: what IF?
What’s our effective defence then? Our brain. Nothing else than it, IF we use it properly. Connect it when you read news, to choose a job, to question a politician, to understand what’s the best way to take care of our garden, or…to decide about a possible Brexit. Keep you intelligently informed. Use it not to follow false prophets, whatever they’re promising: stability (of any kind) or anything else. Everlasting prosperity will be achieved only in a far, distant future (we will! I have faith). For the time being it’s a merely religious conception. For the time being British voters will back EU membership. Because they’re intelligent. No jokes please, we are “Europeans”, we are British. My dear friends, let’s wait for Thursday June 23: The People WILL speak (let’s just hope they’re all aware of 1st April 2016 new restrictive rules).
….Always humble,
Angiolino

(What might you need in your life? Please kindly visit: What do you lack?)

Future of Schengen

We “had” a dream… It was a Europe without borders. Has it already gone? Maybe, at least practically. Only the border guards are missing, wherefore there are already other kinds of physical barriers, such as the Hungarian one. Of course a single currency would remain, regardless. But a United Europe is represented only by freedom of movement, not anything else. In principle the dissolution of the Schengen Agreement alone wouldn’t mark the end of EU. Only in principle: as a matter of fact some politicians are already arguing about what could really remain without it, because the direct result would be an enormous increase in costs and reduced productivity, due to the re-erection of national barriers.

Let’s go a little bit further: a truly United Europe never existed. The concept of its founders of an “ever closer union” was never accepted by Eastern Countries. Signed up, but NOT accepted, merely to benefit of the enormous financial aids received back then. And let’s include UK-“Brexit” as well. The refugee crisis is just showing this sad reality to everybody, crystal clear! National interests are emerging. In some cases even regional interests (Catalonia). Fiscal, harsh rules are not accepted anymore, especially by the more vulnerable Countries like Greece. Politicians are realizing that defending EU policy is more and more counter-productive, and adjusting consequently. Nobody wants to lose an election, although the majority of people is in favour of solidarity (but heavily conditioned by politics), particularly in richer countries. In my view refugees will never be re-allocated throughout the EU: we’re sleepwalking, happily so, while blaming each others’. Decisions must be taken by politicians, not by the people. If a wider EU response is failing, Schengen itself is failing.    

Why are there so many politicians talking about Schengen? Because, one way or another, they’re all in search of an easy electoral victory. If you prefer: give “some” people what they want. Moreover: the hallmark of populism is anger, easily applicable to nowadays events. It can be about culture, economics, wars, religions, with such an abundance of issues (real or fictional). In this case might be, or actually absolutely IS, about refugees. It makes noise, gets attention and therefore votes or in absence of elections, popularity.

Does it also make you win? (Just) apparently yes, wherefore we all have hopes and fears, appealing to interests and conceptions pushing against the prevailing status quo. But it has a volatile nature and can be counterproductive as promises simple answers to complex problems. We should all aim to an “ever closer European Union” instead. Populism flourishes in front of presumed imminent ruin at the hands of opportunistic harbingers of malefactors (refugees, racists, Muslims & Jews, polluters…throw in everything & everyone).

But its fundamentals are lacking. It might exist within the realm ranging from easily persuadable people to people accepting even demagogic extremes, deriving from ignorant demagogues (even in another Continent). The notion of truly solving problems is a completely different matter than counting on sheer force of personality, often without contents, fouling the political arena.

Populism is the ultimate improbable beneficiary of a deeply disenchanted public, lasting only if such public is continually reassured the battle of good against evil will never end. Someone hoping to be the future President of The United States perfectly understands all this very, very well.

But the majority of people wants the battle to finish, sooner or later. Because 2 or 3 million refugees over 500 million European people is NOT a real problem, nor difficult to be handled. It’s just a very powerful weapon in the hands of our politicians: it’s only because of them if Schengen will fail. The difficult way out (at least there would be a solution) would be TOTALLY embracing the concept of an “ever closer union”: that’s it.

….Always humble

Angiolino

(What might you need in your life? Please kindly visit: What do you lack?)