Once upon a time in a beautiful continent named Europe, six countries came together to establish a powerful European Coal and Steel Community. These countries were France, West Germany, Italy, Belgium, Luxembourg and the Netherlands.
The new world of online trading, fintech and marketing – register now for the Finance Magnates Tel Aviv Conference, June 29th 2016.
They did not realize it there and then, but this was to be the first step towards the establishment of what is considered to be one of the strongest unions and economies in the 21st century.
The year was 1973 when the UK, the former financial superpower, opted to join the group in an attempt to rebuild the empire that was lost during World War II. Along with Britain, another 21 countries later joined the same community, which later changed its name to the European Union and chose to use the euro as the official currency of the union member countries.
Still, some of the ‘divas’ in the union were accorded, and still are, with special conditions when it comes to keeping their own currency – such as Britain and the pound sterling.
Britain has always been a foreign player in the EU; it did not adopt the migration rules of free movement on the continent, the single currency, and global ECB interest rates decisions and the welfare policy had no effect on its internal policies. This June, the UK plans to go to a referendum to decide whether or not it should remain a part of the EU. This is a move that clearly many of the high ranked decision makers in the UK are well interested in – but that none wants to be responsible for.
In the 40 years or so since Britain joined the EU there have been talks about the gains of each of the sides of this alliance. On one side there is Europe, benefiting from the financial strength of the number three country in the area, along with an improved public opinion after any positive event occurring in Britain. Europe benefits from UK military forces and the security that comes from the Royal Navy, as well as from from better public trade relations, especially with the US. But the biggest advantage for the EU from this alliance is not having the UK as a competitor when it comes to the worldwide arena for financial, political and military players.
On the other side there is Britain, benefiting from trade rights with very little or no commissions at all, real estate investments in Europe which are far cheaper than in the UK itself, IMF considerations and funds and of course, the extremely talented European football players that have found a place in the English Premier League (does the name Fàbregas ring any bells?).
When looking at all these positive points that have surely helped both parties, it makes you wonder why Britain would ever want to leave the EU. But in reality, all of those benefits can’t seem positive when looking at the overall price inflicted by the weak and supported countries of the EU on the stronger countries.
It actually raises the question among those countries, why should their strong economies support or even collaborate with such weak nations?
How Will Zero-Fee Investment Platforms Impact Traditional Stock Brokers?Go to article >>
In the UK, the ‘biggest mistake’ of today’s generation is going to cost each household another 4,300 pounds per year, according to the UK’s minister of finance, George Osborne. He is completely against the move due to the economic liabilities on British citizens both in the short and long term.
The Queen on the other hand is definitely in favor of Brexiting and she has made it more than clear when claiming that the EU has been heading in the wrong direction for quite a while. But at the end of the day, only the results of the referendum will have the last say.
The referendum will occur on June 23rd, and is already one of the hottest topics worldwide.
People and countries from all over the world weigh the potential benefits and losses from the transition and every voice of authority is trying to tip the scales in its favor.
With the elections coming up in the US this upcoming November, one can only wonder how the runners for the presidency should take advantage of the situation overseas. Trump, the leading Republican candidate, has already mentioned several times that he believes that the Brexit will happen and has probably already started to combine it in his foreign policy. On the Democrat’s side of the field we meet Hilary Clinton, who is claiming with the help of former president and husband Bill Clinton that “it would be awful for the Irish people”.
The only thing that is sure about both Republicans and Democrats is that both parties have much to gain if they play their cards right.
The prevailing view is that some of the countries are just waiting for the right excuse to leave the union, and the Brexit might just be that excuse. That may result in the Netherlands leaving first, followed by Denmark which will apparently join the rest of the Nordic countries, and after those two leave we would be left with Belgium, that would probably want to cut its losses as long as it’s possible.
The winners of the scenario could be Russia, because it may finally get an option to gain a foothold in western Europe, the Nordic countries, which could possibly establish a Nordic union that would help them all benefit in the long term with a strong combined economy, and last but not least, Britain, that could finally start re-building slowly but surely the Queen’s dream for the empire that once was.
Speculations can be made and are made, that a new world order is coming.
A new Europe could be led by the Nordic countries, the Russians, or even the Brits, but the bottom line is that every action has a price – and if you Brexit, you bought it.