The only book to read before the EU vote

[Lavanda]

I've just returned from a week in the UK where everyone I spoke with is going to vote for the UK to leave the EU, notwithstanding the £9 billion government leaflet. The reasons for wanting to leave the EU were confused and varied but immigration was top of the list. While driving on the truly dreadful UK roads I always tune in to the radio, to take my mind off the slowness of the traffic, the delays, the diversions, the jams and the bad driving of other bored drivers, also fiddling with their radios. A few days ago Steve Wright had Yanis Varoufakis on his show to plug Yanis's new book. The final question in the interview was how would Yanis vote in the UK leave the EU referendum, if he had a vote. He replied that it didn't matter much as the UK couldn't leave the EU without devastating its future prosperity. I thought that interesting.

At the airport on Thursday I saw Yanis's book was already No. 6 in the Top 10. I bought the book. I've read it — in fact I couldn't stop reading it. His writing style is deceptively simple and he makes the complicated subject of global and European economics understandable. I learned a lot of things completely new to me but also had other things confirmed. The EU is run by unelected and faceless administrators, true —but not in Brussels — in the American and German banks. Who we elect to our parliaments (and to the EU Parliament) hardly matters anymore. Politicians have almost no real power, which is why the quality of people going into politics today is so poor. The bankers and money really, really do run the show. The book starts in the US during the 1920s and covers the road by which we got to the EU and the Euro and it's not the road most people, think. Including me.

Anyway, here are the details:

"And the Weak Suffer what they Must?" Yanks Varoufakis IBSN 978-1-847-92404-9 Bodley Head £12.99

Read and enjoy.

[olive]

I'll have a look out for that book.

it is £9 million not billion on the propaganda leaflets!. When Cameron resignsover his finances/Jimmy Carr and Boris becomes leader he could send out same amount for leave leaflets.

I like your precis of the UK. Last week ,I had to do a 130 mile round trip Leicester to Chesham mostly via M1 - twice. best average speed was 27 mph.

I did a straw poll with six friends in the pub. one definite IN, one definite OUT (partner at firm of accountants) one no idea yet and three probably out. My family are all out'ers.

[markwilding]

I like Yanis Varoufakis and he comes across as great orator and seems a very intelligent guy but I wouldn't agree with much of his political philosophy. He would be of the Podemos ilk and would take a country down the road to financial ruin. So although I like his utopian dream of how he would like to world to be, I prefer to be a realist and as such will not be reading his book and do not believe he is correct regarding Brexit.

Both the right and far left are anti EU for completely different reasons.

[Lavanda]

Perhaps you should read his book, Mark. He is most certainly not anti-Europe but neither is he for Europe in its present state.

[markwilding]

His country Greece is all that is wrong about the EU. I have no problem with my taxes being used to invest in the poorer EU states as long as that money used correctly to help them grow economically and eventually become an equal trading partner and being able to invest back into the UK or now Spain.
He and Greece expected the Euro zone countries to continually bail them out with favourable conditions so they could continue their crazy social policies and when they wouldn't, they blamed everybody but themselves.

Why should we work until we are 67 while some in Greece can retire in their early fifties? Remember, he was the Greek finance minister promising no conditions to bail outs, which was basically promising the impossible.

In my opinion the guy talks the talk and is very likeable but many of his ideas are unworkable in the real world.

[Lavanda]

If that is what you think happened you need to read the book. If you object to Mr Varoufakis, don't read his book. Not reading different points of view to those you, yourself, hold is always a good idea and narrows understanding in a very reassuring way. Try reading somewhere else but, in any event, do some reading. People, and I include myself, really have no idea what is going on in Europe. Obviously, you don't either.

[Stevemul]

If you don't fancy forking out the £12.99 to buy it, you can read a chunk free on the preview on Kindle

[pigs-might-fly]

http://www.breitbart.com/london/2016/04 ... ite-fight/

[katy]

If I were panning to read a book about the EU (I'm not) I would buy Daniel Hannans 'Why vote leave'. There is an interesting extract in the DM today which exposes the self interest behind the organisations backing remain. A lot is what I have said before in other EU threads re. Charities, BBC etc getting huge amounts from EU. This money is accounted when reckoning our net contribution but we in the UK may not want to give it to them!

Exposed, the cheerleaders for Brussels.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... in-EU.html

[Lavanda]

The most interesting bit in the above link, for me, is the blue box halfway down on the right-hand side. Of course the EU is undemocratic as it is run by the banks and not anyone else. The EU was first designed to be a trading consortium to promote the heavy industries of France and Germany such as coal and steel. France and Germany are the EU. The rest are hangers-on. France and Germany do what they like and change the rules as they like — but other countries must obey the rules. I'm voting to leave if only to get rid of that idiot Farage who starts every sentence with the word "I", although Hannan is not quite so silly.

As an addition to the point Mark raised, why is the scheme to lend huge loans to poor people in the US who could never pay them back now referred to as 'irresponsible banking' while the scheme to lend huge loans to Greeks who could never pay them back is referred to as 'irresponsible Greeks'? Seems like one rule for one and one rule for another. No?

[markwilding]

If that is what you think happened you need to read the book. If you object to Mr Varoufakis, don't read his book. Not reading different points of view to those you, yourself, hold is always a good idea and narrows understanding in a very reassuring way. Try reading somewhere else but, in any event, do some reading. People, and I include myself, really have no idea what is going on in Europe. Obviously, you don't either.

That's only what happened from his point of view. Why would not reading his book narrow my point of view any more than not reading Arthur Scargill's opinion of what happened during the miner's strike?

There is a lot of what he says which I agree with such as the refugee crisis, not the causes but what needs to be done to help them. Another point I agree with is his view of being able to influence changes in the EU from within. In the interviews and debates I've listened to and watched he actually says were he able to vote, he would vote to stay in and he outlines reasons why and what might happen if there is one, making one very important point that The UK economy will still be influenced by decisions made in the EU and problems caused by Britain's exit.

[markwilding]

Th

As an addition to the point Mark raised, why is the scheme to lend huge loans to poor people in the US who could never pay them back now referred to as 'irresponsible banking' while the scheme to lend huge loans to Greeks who could never pay them back is referred to as 'irresponsible Greeks'? Seems like one rule for one and one rule for another. No?

I'm not actually saying exactly that. I agree the banks were irresponsible and should be held to account but so were many borrowers and money was invested unwisely and as we have seen here in Spain a lot of the money has been siphoned off. Would there be so many problems had that money been invested properly and had gone to its correct destination.
The problem with the banks is very complex. Supposing no tax payers money was used to bail them out, What would the result of that have been? In my opinion it would have spelt disaster for the world's economy and we would have seen a crisis on a far greater scale than we had. That's not to say I don't think there should be more regulation and top bankers shouldn't be held to account with, if necessary, criminal proceedings.

[Lavanda]

As I understand it and this is me, not anyone else, the money used to bail out the banks wasn't real and only existed on paper. The Euro is backed up by the ECB but that bank is not backed up by any government or any real value. The Euro is pegged to ... Itself. At least that is my reading of what has gone wrong. However, as you wrote, it's complex. Yes! I think the banks should have gone bankrupt, chaos would have followed and then life would have gone on. Notwithstanding Globalisation there is more of the world NOT interested in the affairs of the Euro and the EU than is. We think everything revolves around us ... But it doesn't. As an aside, it's like the panic to 'save' British Steel. It's not been British for ages and ages. We're delusional. In Devon, last week, someone told me they are an 'outer' because they wanted to keep British Steel, British. Ho! Hum!

[markwilding]

. Yes! I think the banks should have gone bankrupt, chaos would have followed and then life would have gone on!

Not for millions who would have lost everything. I think you are underestimating the devastation it would have caused.

As an aside, it's like the panic to 'save' British Steel. It's not been British for ages and ages. We're delusional. In Devon, last week, someone told me they are an 'outer' because they wanted to keep British Steel, British. Ho! Hum!

I get your point. However, it hasn't been called British Steel for ages either.

[Lavanda]

No, I think the devastation would be pretty devastating. For example we would probably lose most of our pensions as they are related to investments and stock exchanges. This would throw most pensioners into poverty, I think. However, none of the economic problems of the EU, UK, US and world have gone away. Plasters have been applied but they are not sticking very well. The millions who will lose everything may get a few more months to 'prepare' themselves but the devastation will fall on them anyway. How do you see this NOT coming to pass?

[markwilding]

There is a great film doing the rounds at the moment called 'The Big Short' based on the banking crisis and it seems many didn't predict the bubble would burst.
However, Nobody could convince me that if the UK had not been an EU member, things would have been different.

[masterob]

Surely the point about Steel is not its name or who owns it but the huge loss of jobs were the plants to close!

[Lavanda]

Agreed but my point was that the person I spoke with was going to vote "out" in order to keep the jobs and the steel works. As if it is something to do with the EU rather than, for example, India, the country in which the actual owners (and new buyers) live. Some people are simply ... stupid ... and they get to vote!!!

[masterob]

... aren't they the ones who want to remain? Hush my mouth!

[katy]

There is a great film doing the rounds at the moment called 'The Big Short' based on the banking crisis and it seems many didn't predict the bubble would burst.
However, Nobody could convince me that if the UK had not been an EU member, things would have been different.

Agree. It was a case of America sneezing. I do remember the EU saying it can't happen to us whilst people were queuing outside Northern Rock . Same as the Stock Exchange, global now. They all go up and down together.

Big Bankers dinner tonight in London. Raising money for remain camp, payback time. Goldman Sachs has pledged £500,000. A few others £200,000. Perhaps it's for another propaganda booklet.