Brexit and the Consequences

[counter_violent]

 

[Atilla]

Hi Atilla

France and Germany will gain and the UK will lose! Obviously you didn't get enough fresh air!

Total exports to the UK for 2016 from the EU

Germany 88bln
France 35bln
..
..

Some sectors will be more affected than others but one thing is for sure, the biggest hitters are not items that can easily be switched out for EU equivalents.

On a scale of 1 to 10 where 10 is catastrophic I would place Brexit impact as a 4 on a no deal.


Brad

Lots of numbers to digest there and it boils down to that one argument Brexiters cling to. We have deficit in trade with EU and WTO will hurt them more than us and somehow collecting extra revenue give the UK an advantage. This is a fallacy of an assumption and a very simplistic one to make because:

The man who buys BMW, Merc or Audi or the French and Italian cars will continue to do so. In fact Metropolitan police prefers to buy the more expensive BMW cars because they are more reliable and cost of ownership outweigh the higher price.

As mentioned before the other one that we'll be able to source stuff cheaper from else where, ignores key point that suppliers prefer to compete on product differentiation not on price and thus prices will rise in proportion to currency fluctuations to maintain current price parities.

Underlying business economics is too much in depth analysis and difficult to compute and put forward to mass public the simple cartoon type single points, which resonate well. You have gone into some lengths pulling out those numbers.

If you are genuinely interested in the analysis look at UK export and import numbers post WWII to UK joining EU 1972 and then compare change in trends.


It will be of academic interest to watch carefully what happens to UK trade & BoP should it fall out of EU due to tory incompetence. Hope that EU will fall apart is just wishful thinking. On the contrary deterioration of the UK trade numbers will only further strengthen France and Germany. The stakes are very high indeed.


As for rating the damage to UK industry, I'd say a hard brexit with WTO rules will be a 6-7 out of 10 over a 20 year period.

 

[dbphoenix]

It appears that the UK's chief export will be rose-colored glasses.

 

[Atilla]

It appears that the UK's chief export will be rose-colored glasses.

Yes indeed, objective business analysis has gone out the window replaced with hte media circus's biased politicians bull **** which the public slurps up if it matches their level of intellect.

I believe Parliament has the best civil servants and access to brains in the world. Instead we are led by blabber mouthed buffoons pursuing political ambition and money above national interest. That goes for TM too. In or out no one knows what she believes. Plays angles to keep herself in power.

 

[FXX]

Lots of numbers to digest there and it boils down to that one argument Brexiters cling to. We have deficit in trade with EU and WTO will hurt them more than us and somehow collecting extra revenue give the UK an advantage. This is a fallacy of an assumption and a very simplistic one to make because:

The man who buys BMW, Merc or Audi or the French and Italian cars will continue to do so. In fact Metropolitan police prefers to buy the more expensive BMW cars because they are more reliable and cost of ownership outweighed higher price.

As mentioned before the other one that we'll be able to source stuff cheaper from else where, ignores key point that suppliers prefer to compete on product differentiation not on price and thus prices will rise in proportion to currency fluctuations to maintain current price parities.

Underlying business economics is too much in depth analysis and difficult to compute and put forward to mass public the simple cartoon type single points resonate well. You have gone into some lengths pulling out those numbers.

If you are genuinely interested in the analysis look at UK export and import numbers post WWII to UK joining EU 1972 and then compare change in trends.


It will be of academic interest to watch carefully what happens to UK trade & BoP should it fall out of EU due to tory incompetence. Hope that EU will fall apart is just wishful thinking. On the contrary deterioration of the UK trade numbers will only further strengthen France and Germany. The stakes are very high indeed.


As for rating the damage to UK industry, I'd say a hard brexit with WTO rules will be a 6-7 out of 10 over a 20 year period.

Assumptions are on both sides of the argument, not just leavers. You for example are assuming Germany and France will be better off but you can't offer any evidence to support that claim. The same can be said for suppliers who are in the hands of the buyers who choose price over differentiation for most common goods. Lidl is a perfect example of this where their only differentiation is price and their success speaks for itself. Differentiation on the supplier side only becomes important when dealing in luxury goods.

There are 195 countries in the world and 127 are operating a trade deficit. It's normal and thanks to countries like Japan, China, India and a number of others, it isn't going to go away.

Looking at trade numbers after WW2 is not going to provide support to the eu debate. It was the golden recovery globally and the only reason the UK didn't come out stronger and was forced to join the EU was because of debt, inflation, and the socialist agenda that crippled our economy. If we had proper leadership we probably would never have joined the EU and today you would probably be debating how bad the EU is and how glad you are not part of it.

We dont need to be part of the block to enjoy prosperity. Much of the best technology emerged from the UK yet we are constantly being talked down like we will fall off a cliff if we leave. If the EU is so good then why did they fail to recognise the flaws in their system. They invented the euro and showcased it as the solution to prosperity.

Taking Spain as an example. 9 years after they slipped into crisis they are still struggling. They have broken the current account deficit convergence criteria and have to decide if they raise taxes or cut costs at a time when they need to be spending on growth. They are forced to do this as part of the requirements that were poorly thought out.

An economy that goes through a recession typically leans on mechanisms to aid recovery such as currency devaluation and interest rates. In a currency union you can't do that. The EU is on the verge of raising rates but Spain needs to keep them down. The mechanisms to deal with crisis are transformed into mechanisms that deepen crisis. Germany dealt with this using internal devaluation through wage reductions but this hasn't worked in other countries that have a weaker manufacturing base. Internal devaluations don't work so the euro zone is never going to enjoy the sort of growth that could be possible and it will always leave members exposed to crisis.

The next phase of this eu project will be its undoing. They seem to believe their issues can be solved by deeper integration. This worked in the USA where everyone speaks the same language with no differences in culture across states. If someone from New York moves to Texas then he/she won't be perceived as an immigrant but rather an American. You can't get this in the eu so integration is much harder and makes the locals uneasy. If a USA state has a budget crisis then the federal system can loan money to assist recovery. The EU doesn't have this mechanism so countries have to lend from the IMF with very strict conditions that make it even more difficult to recover.

The rise of the right across Europe is going to be unstoppable as deeper integration removes more control and immigration alters a country's identity. Brexit, Germany has a coalition with far right, France got close to far right power, Austria now has a far right leader. The list goes on as the unease of what's happening grows. Southern Europe is going to be a problem aswell as they seem to be feeling the brunt of African migration and stale growth. Why would anyone want to remain in a sinking ship is beyond my compression.

We have set the scene for the next major crisis following 10 years of cheap money. Stock markets globally are at all time highs and there is still a lot of bad debt around. Personal debt is off the scale and any significant bump in interest rates is going to set in motion another deleveraging cycle except this time countries have no money for bailouts and a major bank going down will ignite a bomb. The last place we want to be is in the EU when this happens because we will be the ones that has to bail out poor EU countries.

Brad

 

[counter_violent]

Assumptions are on both sides of the argument, not just leavers. You for example are assuming Germany and France will be better off but you can't offer any evidence to support that claim. The same can be said for suppliers who are in the hands of the buyers who choose price over differentiation for most common goods. Lidl is a perfect example of this where their only differentiation is price and their success speaks for itself. Differentiation on the supplier side only becomes important when dealing in luxury goods.

There are 195 countries in the world and 127 are operating a trade deficit. It's normal and thanks to countries like Japan, China, India and a number of others, it isn't going to go away.

Looking at trade numbers after WW2 is not going to provide support to the eu debate. It was the golden recovery globally and the only reason the UK didn't come out stronger and was forced to join the EU was because of debt, inflation, and the socialist agenda that crippled our economy. If we had proper leadership we probably would never have joined the EU and today you would probably be debating how bad the EU is and how glad you are not part of it.

We dont need to be part of the block to enjoy prosperity. Much of the best technology emerged from the UK yet we are constantly being talked down like we will fall off a cliff if we leave. If the EU is so good then why did they fail to recognise the flaws in their system. They invented the euro and showcased it as the solution to prosperity.

Taking Spain as an example. 9 years after they slipped into crisis they are still struggling. They have broken the current account deficit convergence criteria and have to decide if they raise taxes or cut costs at a time when they need to be spending on growth. They are forced to do this as part of the requirements that were poorly thought out.

An economy that goes through a recession typically leans on mechanisms to aid recovery such as currency devaluation and interest rates. In a currency union you can't do that. The EU is on the verge of raising rates but Spain needs to keep them down. The mechanisms to deal with crisis are transformed into mechanisms that deepen crisis. Germany dealt with this using internal devaluation through wage reductions but this hasn't worked in other countries that have a weaker manufacturing base. Internal devaluations don't work so the euro zone is never going to enjoy the sort of growth that could be possible and it will always leave members exposed to crisis.

The next phase of this eu project will be its undoing. They seem to believe their issues can be solved by deeper integration. This worked in the USA where everyone speaks the same language with no differences in culture across states. If someone from New York moves to Texas then he/she won't be perceived as an immigrant but rather an American. You can't get this in the eu so integration is much harder and makes the locals uneasy. If a USA state has a budget crisis then the federal system can loan money to assist recovery. The EU doesn't have this mechanism so countries have to lend from the IMF with very strict conditions that make it even more difficult to recover.

The rise of the right across Europe is going to be unstoppable as deeper integration removes more control and immigration alters a country's identity. Brexit, Germany has a coalition with far right, France got close to far right power, Austria now has a far right leader. The list goes on as the unease of what's happening grows. Southern Europe is going to be a problem aswell as they seem to be feeling the brunt of African migration and stale growth. Why would anyone want to remain in a sinking ship is beyond my compression.

We have set the scene for the next major crisis following 10 years of cheap money. Stock markets globally are at all time highs and there is still a lot of bad debt around. Personal debt is off the scale and any significant bump in interest rates is going to set in motion another deleveraging cycle except this time countries have no money for bailouts and a major bank going down will ignite a bomb. The last place we want to be is in the EU when this happens because we will be the ones that has to bail out poor EU countries.

Brad

Thanks Brad, we have been trying to re-educate Atilla and the other remoaners for the longest time. No harm in persisting I suppose, but don't expect a conversion anytime soon

 

[Splitlink]

I reckon all those kids have more sense than you. They know whats coming.. Another thing, they are young enough to be able to vote with their feet, later on.

 

[timsk]

It appears that the UK's chief export will be rose-colored glasses.

. . . and the EU's chief export will be blinkers.

 

[Atilla]

Assumptions are on both sides of the argument, not just leavers. You for example are assuming Germany and France will be better off but you can't offer any evidence to support that claim. The same can be said for suppliers who are in the hands of the buyers who choose price over differentiation for most common goods. Lidl is a perfect example of this where their only differentiation is price and their success speaks for itself. Differentiation on the supplier side only becomes important when dealing in luxury goods.

Both Germany and France (as well as the UK) benefited tremendously from the EU and continue to do so. This is a matter of fact considering where they were and where they are now.

If they were going to be worse off, they'd be taking a much softer line accommodating UK's tough line. Let's give you the benefit of the doubt and say they are pursuing a course of action which will hurt them when the UK leaves. Even if some businesses do leave London and the UK and locate in Germany or France.

Considering EU represents approx 45% of UK exports and the UK is only 12% of EU exports it's simple maths to figure out who's going to hurt more from loss of trade.

With respect to Lidl and pricing policy you are desperately twisting their pricing policy to match your Brexit agenda which is quite common as Brexiters don't have any bones to chew on.

Two main reasons for low pricing are:

1. increase market share
2. predatory pricing to eliminate or acquire competition

UK's grocery sector was earning good profits with few operators like Tesco and Sainsbury's. Asda (Walmart), Lidl and Aldi are all relatively new entrants in the last 20 years.

Lidl's quality of their goods while for most stuff is good but in contrast to the likes of Waitrose or premier brands, it is below par. They don't sell as many top end branded goods either. So your assertion is not accurate. The quality of their goods on offer are low which is reflected in pricing as a new market entrants positioning it self at the lower end.

Here think about this, why does the FTSE100 go up when ever the pound drops?
It is because foreign international earning reflect in higher profits in £pounds.

Why don't FTSE100 companies lower prices to increase market share?
Because, that may start a price war with similar price reductions from other competitors. It makes no sense as price wars harm producers eventually killing one off.

Instead often a market leader is picked and competition takes place in product promotions with similar pricing parities.

No BS-ing you honest guv. I ain't no politiiiician!


There are 195 countries in the world and 127 are operating a trade deficit. It's normal and thanks to countries like Japan, China, India and a number of others, it isn't going to go away.

Looking at trade numbers after WW2 is not going to provide support to the eu debate. It was the golden recovery globally and the only reason the UK didn't come out stronger and was forced to join the EU was because of debt, inflation, and the socialist agenda that crippled our economy. If we had proper leadership we probably would never have joined the EU and today you would probably be debating how bad the EU is and how glad you are not part of it. This is in start contrast to common interpretation that Churchill looked down his nose at Europe and put France, much like a lap dog to keep a check on the build up of the German war machine by establishing the European Steel and Coal Community.

Only to later discover Churchill whilst a war time leader who stood up to Hitler (not forgetting without Russia and America he too would have been toast), he wasn't really much of a leader or politician in post-war time. Some people do load it up and let's bang our drums and fly the flag but this kind of approach also leads to trumped up false belief as you represent. UK was the sick man of Europe falling behind neighbours prior to 1970s and the oil shock. That's why despite French opposition it tried it's damn hardest for over 10 years to become a full member.

There are facts then there is fiction and make believe. Believe what you want but it doesn't change facts.

We dont need to be part of the block to enjoy prosperity. Much of the best technology emerged from the UK yet we are constantly being talked down like we will fall off a cliff if we leave. If the EU is so good then why did they fail to recognise the flaws in their system. They invented the euro and showcased it as the solution to prosperity. Yes you are right in the first part much of new R&D comes out of military budgets but UK is so very very **** poor at bringing such products to market due to short sighted banking invesment sector and little sponsorship from Government. Hence, these ideas usually end up in the US financed and eventually owned by them. No change here I'm afraid. On the contrary Thatcher fecking nailed that coffin some time ago listening to the yanks.

You remember Westland Helicopter fiasko with that so called treacherous Heseltine who wanted to maintain British built chopper over the Skiorsky? But true blue patriotic Thatcher wanted to shut it down and buy it cheaper from the yanks? Well who could have guessed we'd end up here now still being shafted by them over the Bombardier sales into the US. Go figure.

Taking Spain as an example. 9 years after they slipped into crisis they are still struggling. They have broken the current account deficit convergence criteria and have to decide if they raise taxes or cut costs at a time when they need to be spending on growth. They are forced to do this as part of the requirements that were poorly thought out.

An economy that goes through a recession typically leans on mechanisms to aid recovery such as currency devaluation and interest rates. In a currency union you can't do that. The EU is on the verge of raising rates but Spain needs to keep them down. The mechanisms to deal with crisis are transformed into mechanisms that deepen crisis. Germany dealt with this using internal devaluation through wage reductions but this hasn't worked in other countries that have a weaker manufacturing base. Internal devaluations don't work so the euro zone is never going to enjoy the sort of growth that could be possible and it will always leave members exposed to crisis. You are right here and indeed this is the major issue with the Euro. As well as a central bank and harmonising taxation policy it needs to harmonise fiscal side and spending too. Effectively taking control of political spending out of badly managed countries / politicians hands. UK included. Centralise and control. Consolidate good practice and standards.

The next phase of this eu project will be its undoing. They seem to believe their issues can be solved by deeper integration. This worked in the USA where everyone speaks the same language with no differences in culture across states. If someone from New York moves to Texas then he/she won't be perceived as an immigrant but rather an American. You can't get this in the eu so integration is much harder and makes the locals uneasy. If a USA state has a budget crisis then the federal system can loan money to assist recovery. The EU doesn't have this mechanism so countries have to lend from the IMF with very strict conditions that make it even more difficult to recover. See above. Yes fiscal policies need to be governed and not left to rogue politicians to play with. Corbyn comes to mind here too. He stated in the party conference he favours giving regional aid and grants to send companies up North to places that don't make economic sense. However, this is against EU rules and so his cold on EU and warm on Brexit. Alternatively, UK can continue paying 9bn and as the EU already does, UK can seek regional grants which Wales is a big benefactor of for now.

The rise of the right across Europe is going to be unstoppable as deeper integration removes more control and immigration alters a country's identity. Brexit, Germany has a coalition with far right, France got close to far right power, Austria now has a far right leader. The list goes on as the unease of what's happening grows. Southern Europe is going to be a problem aswell as they seem to be feeling the brunt of African migration and stale growth. Why would anyone want to remain in a sinking ship is beyond my compression. The rise of the right will be put to bed soon enough. West has aging population and as for UK read somewhere like every week or day 90 young people are taken away from desperate abusive families and placed in local care. That's what skewed income inequality does to society.

We have set the scene for the next major crisis following 10 years of cheap money. Stock markets globally are at all time highs and there is still a lot of bad debt around. Personal debt is off the scale and any significant bump in interest rates is going to set in motion another deleveraging cycle except this time countries have no money for bailouts and a major bank going down will ignite a bomb. The last place we want to be is in the EU when this happens because we will be the ones that has to bail out poor EU countries.

Brad

I think the only country UK bailed out was Ireland with 8bn contribution. I could be wrong here.

Collapse of the EU is wishful thinking. Some countries may leave, free to do so but as we are seeing that'll only lead to the core becoming stronger.

Like a possible trade going against you - consider what happens if UK leaves, stumbles and falls and this will make Germany and France stronger. It's a risk that should be considered. A very big risk.

We'll see soon enough. Give it 10 to 20 years for results to come in.


I think I'm done for the weekend. Almost like writing essays again.

 

[timsk]

. . . Collapse of the EU is wishful thinking. Some countries may leave, free to do so but as we are seeing that'll only lead to the core becoming stronger. . .

Hi Atilla,
I can't speak for other Brexiteers but, personally, I have no desire to see the collapse of the EU. However, collapse it will unless it implements major reforms which, needless to say, it shows no sign of doing. This is the chief reason I voted leave: it's better to bail out early before the sinking ship actually goes down. And the simple reason that its collapse is inevitable (as it stands currently) is because essentially it's a giant Ponzi scheme. As you and everyone else on this forum knows (or on this thread at least) - Ponzi schemes always fall apart in the end. The only distinction between the EU and someone like Bernie Madoff is that everyone is aware and understands that the EU is a Ponzi scheme, whereas Madoff's clients were kept in the dark about it. That's why he's gone to jail for 150 years while Junker, Tusk and Schulz et al swan around in chauffeur driven limos, dine at the finest restaurants and stay in the best hotels. Fair play to them - a cool trick to be able to pull off!
Tim.

 

[Signalcalc]

It's a shame we don't have a conservative government, Brexit would be settled by now.

 

[mike.]

One only has to look at FIFA or South Africa to see how power and corruption go hand in hand..The E U is no different. Only if and when the people stand up to them can you force any type of reform....

 

[Splitlink]

Hi Atilla,
I can't speak for other Brexiteers but, personally, I have no desire to see the collapse of the EU. However, collapse it will unless it implements major reforms which, needless to say, it shows no sign of doing. This is the chief reason I voted leave: it's better to bail out early before the sinking ship actually goes down. And the simple reason that its collapse is inevitable (as it stands currently) is because essentially it's a giant Ponzi scheme. As you and everyone else on this forum knows (or on this thread at least) - Ponzi schemes always fall apart in the end. The only distinction between the EU and someone like Bernie Madoff is that everyone is aware and understands that the EU is a Ponzi scheme, whereas Madoff's clients were kept in the dark about it. That's why he's gone to jail for 150 years while Junker, Tusk and Schulz et al swan around in chauffeur driven limos, dine at the finest restaurants and stay in the best hotels. Fair play to them - a cool trick to be able to pull off!
Tim.

Tim, the EU is not alone with the debt problem. The world keeps on getting into debt year by year and the value of cash keeps getting lower.

Would you believe that I find myself turning my nose up if the weekly lottery prize is only a measly 20 million euros? I decide to leave it for a week until it grows a few millions more. Why waste money?

Joking apart, it is a sign of how little today's money is worth. My dad spent a few bob per week in the hope of picking a 100 thousand on the Treble Chance.

When we exchanged posts, so long ago--(summer last year?) about the billion UK would save, by leaving, it doesn't seem so much, now, does it?

 

[Pat494]

Will the EU elite back Catalonia or Madrid ?
The breaking up of established countries within the EU does strengthen Brussels' hand and the centralists want that.

 

[counter_violent]

Kids and silly old farts.

I reckon all those kids have more sense than you. They know whats coming.. Another thing, they are young enough to be able to vote with their feet, later on.

There are reasons neither are in power you know.

 

[timsk]

. . .When we exchanged posts, so long ago--(summer last year?) about the billion UK would save, by leaving, it doesn't seem so much, now, does it?

Hi Split',
Our memories differ I'm afraid; no surprises there, lol! I recall a figure of £8billion p/a which some peeps in the remain camp dismissed as 'chump change'. Try telling that to people having to wait 6 weeks for their tax credits! The other thing to remember is that the money saved is just one part of the jigsaw - it's not the only reason why leaving the EU is in the U.K.'s best interests.
Tim.

 

[tomorton]

Hi Atilla,
I can't speak for other Brexiteers but, personally, I have no desire to see the collapse of the EU. However, collapse it will unless it implements major reforms which, needless to say, it shows no sign of doing. This is the chief reason I voted leave: it's better to bail out early before the sinking ship actually goes down.......
Tim.

Hi Tim -

This is perfectly rational thinking and clearly put. I agree, there's no economic advantage in being a member of a failing economic union. On an economic basis, if the EU was clearly failing and was beyond recovery, exit would be the only sane vote. But that would be a black/white economic question and would not entail a referendum. As I recall it, all the leave campaigns wanted a referendum, so they clearly didn't believe they cold raise the evidence that the EU was in an economic death spiral. So as a voter why should I believe that it is?

Even more dangerous is you imply that you would wish to remain in an economic union if it were economically sound.

Any other stipulations? Surely? Like continuing political sovereignty?
(we should all be conscious by now that the EU is a fore-runner to a United States of Europe and that its economic mission is simply the scaffolding for this objective.)

Onwards and upwards,
Tom

 

[Splitlink]

Will the EU elite back Catalonia or Madrid ?
The breaking up of established countries within the EU does strengthen Brussels' hand and the centralists want that.

They have said, vey clearly, that Cataluña will not be in the EU if she goes independent. EU is backing Madrid.

First steps of Madrid taking over here have been taken, today. Puigdemont is going to answer at 9pm, but he was careful not to say whether he would declare independence, or not. If he does, it seems that he and his cabinet will be relieved of their posts.

Autonomic elections guaranteed in maximum of six months.

 

[counter_violent]

The breakdown of the EU will not come from economic collapse. The economic collapse will come from the breakdown of the EU and loss of control. The list of countries who have grievances now with the direction of travel is growing every year. The cohesion that the EU is supposed to represent is completely lost.

For anyone wanting to see what's really going on, you will of course need to look outside the mainstream press and reporting. There are some very disturbing things going on which the establishment are either covering up or failing to report and deal with.

 

[timsk]

Hiya Tom,

This is perfectly rational thinking and clearly put. I agree, there's no economic advantage in being a member of a failing economic union. On an economic basis, if the EU was clearly failing and was beyond recovery, exit would be the only sane vote. But that would be a black/white economic question and would not entail a referendum. As I recall it, all the leave campaigns wanted a referendum, so they clearly didn't believe they cold raise the evidence that the EU was in an economic death spiral. So as a voter why should I believe that it is?

If you are of the view that I am wrong to assert that Ponzi schemes always fail (sooner or later) then, yes, it's reasonable to believe that the EU can potter along indefinitely. Quite literally, they would be the exception that proves the rule.

My view is that the EU are cacking themselves over the divorce bill (with good reason) because they know that the rich nations will have to dig even deeper into their pockets to prop up the poor ones. Alternatively, they can cut the budgets to the weaker members. Either way, it'll lead to even more discontent and, inevitably (IMO), sooner or later another country will say 'enough is enough'. It doesn't much matter if one of the net beneficiaries does that but, when another net contributor on the scale of the U.K. does it - it'll be curtains for the EU. It's just a question of time.

Unless the EU reforms - it will definitely fail - no shadow of a doubt about that in my mind at all. The really big fear is that it will be Germany (following, say, the collapse of Deutsche Bank). That would not only be catastrophic to the EU - but could precipitate a global financial crisis that would completely dwarf that of ten years ago.

Even more dangerous is you imply that you would wish to remain in an economic union if it were economically sound..

Sorry, I didn't mean to imply that - but I see why you've interpreted my comment that way. To clarify, I'm in favour of EU countries facilitating trade between one another as that's in everyone's best interests. That was the original idea back in the 70s and I still support it. What I object to is the way that the EU has morphed into a one size fits all political monster which, IMO, isn't in anyone's best interests - least of all ours.

Any other stipulations? Surely? Like continuing political sovereignty?
(we should all be conscious by now that the EU is a fore-runner to a United States of Europe and that its economic mission is simply the scaffolding for this objective.

Agreed, I think everyone's clear about that now - largely thanks to last year's referendum. Prior to that, a great many people thought (me included to some degree), that the EU was just one big happy family; a lovely club brimming with sweetness 'n light and bursting with goodwill and good intentions to all. That seems spectacularly naive now - we're all so much wiser!
Tim.