The EU behaves as if it were a prison

20 years Ago, the Euro was introduced. What is your assessment?
at the Beginning of the Euro brought with it a big Party, and then the big cat.

What do you mean?
at the Beginning of the Euro to the left, that could be the fault of some countries to low interest rates, in Excess. In the Party you have consumed so much cheap drugs that you need now methadone. You don't have to be from the European Central Bank, and indirectly from the German taxpayer to unlimited supported, in order for the currency Union collapses.

For Jean-Claude Juncker, he is a "Symbol of the sovereignty and stability" of Europe.
The Euro is a Symbol for coated and measured ideas on how you can construct a European Union. It interferes with the formation of a political Union. The EU is a boon for development. She has freely enables you to trade and growth in Europe, but is threatened by the Euro.

What is wrong?
You would have been able to integrate the EU in the 90s, politically more, and to do so without a common currency. And then, after a political Union, it would be possible to create a common currency. The political Union is a prerequisite for the Functioning of a common currency, and not Vice versa.

Has brought the Euro to stability, such as Jean-Claude Juncker said?
The Euro has provided financial stability for the banking system – think of the unlimited intervention of the European Central Bank. But he has reduced the political stability of the EU, because it has already been reduced after its announcement in 1995, the interest rates, so that in southern Europe, a price bubble arose, which destroyed the competitiveness of the South. These countries have not recovered to this day. The Disaster has swept radical political parties in the parliaments and in the Power. You think of Greece or Italy.

In these countries the cat is the greatest.
In Italy, industrial production is still 17 percent less than before the crisis in 2007, when the Party came to an end. In Greece it is 20 percent in Spain, 21 per cent. And even in France, the industrial production, 9 percent below the pre-crisis level. Germany is 9 percent higher. A scissors has opened up in Europe.

To add to this instability, the Problem of the Brexit now.
We are not allowed to take the Brexit lightly. The United Kingdom is the second largest economy in the EU, as large as the 19 smallest countries. The Brexit is so economically as if 19 would leak out of 28 countries.

"That part of the Migration that is motivated by social gifts, is inefficient."

The British house of Commons the agreement for the Brexit rejected this week. The former Federal Bank President and current Chairman of UBS, Axel Weber, recently called in an Interview that the EU must make the United Kingdom a different, better deal than in the past. You see?
He's right. The EU behaves as if it were a prison. The countries that want out or aren't going to be punished. Therefore, we developed the theory of "cherry-picking" and accuses the these countries. Who wants to stay in it, you must meet all of the four fundamental freedoms – the free movement of capital, services, goods and persons. Who wants to get out, can not eliminate alone the free movement of persons, as the British call it, but have to dispense with all four fundamental freedoms. This is an economically untenable Position. It only serves to punish the exiting country – because you are afraid that there are other countries that would follow.

This is from the point of view of the EU to understand?
But not legitimate. What is a System that needs to keep by means of penalties? Economically, it is just when the people are not allowed to wander freely, it is important to allow the trade in goods. Free trade can, in fact, replace the missing labour migration. In 500 years the free-trade history of the world splendidly, most of the time without any migration, the rights of the people.

So you propose that the free movement of persons to take back? The is, however, very popular in the EU.
no, that's not what I said. Labour migration is useful and creates prosperity. But if it is not allowed, then you should grant at least the other fundamental freedoms. Instead of limiting labour migration, I would argue, to limit the Migration in the social systems. You could agree, for example, that the home country is for the social services in charge, until a Migrant has worked out the benefits of the host country. So it was earlier in Switzerland, as the home Church for the social welfare of their citizens is responsible, wherever they lived. The Migration would of course go back, but that would not be a disadvantage. You can also have too much Migration.

when there is too much Migration?
If someone wanders, because he deserves to be in the host country, then this increases the national product of the EU. This Migration is good. That part of the Migration, however, is motivated by social gifts, which is inefficient. If someone migrates for the sake of the social benefits, it reduces the overall prosperity in the EU. If you would offer to the British, the social inclusion of the EU to change the rules in such a way that the stops, social magnetism, the attraction of the social system, could you reject this offer it is difficult and would remain in the EU.

the rejection of the resignation agreement Brings the British closer to the time of such offer to the EU?
First of all, the rejection of the agreement, the decision is not to withdraw, for the time being once, and this is a good decision. The EU should take advantage of this Situation now. With the outlined deal, the EU would admit that the social magnetism is a real Problem, and that it is willing to solve it. In the case of a second Referendum, the British would certainly decide differently than 2016.

And what happens if the EU remains with the British hard?
What the British do, I don't know. But for Germany, an exit would not be good. The southerners would then have more Power in the EU Council. Germany and the other Northern countries would be the losers. In fact, Germany would have to speak immediately to a change in the termination of the Maastricht Treaty, with the request that the rules, as in the EU, Decisions are taken, to the new circumstances.

And what are the economic consequences would be?
The EU would be to develop without the free-trade entering the UK, successively to a trade fortress, in the more-than-competitive industries with tariffs protected. The biggest loser of such a development of the German export industry would be, because the other countries would immediately impose tariffs on goods from the EU. Switzerland would be among the losers, because their economy is closely linked to the German intertwined.

This corresponds to the global Renaissance of protectionism. Should not company the German Chancellor something about it?
Yes. But the Chancellor thinks politically and not economically. She sees in the EU legal integration in Europe, and hopes to be wrong, that the path taken leads eventually to a political Union. It maps the economic things, political objectives, with the result that the thing crumbled, ultimately, politically. This is what we see currently in southern Europe and in France. A prosperous economy is the basic condition that people are happy here in the EU, and that radical parties have no Chance. And this is not the case, because politicians who had economic no idea, hiding their ignorance behind the buzzword from the alleged primacy of politics is wrong.

What do you think of the proposal that is doing the rounds in Brussels as well as in London, the British could re-join Efta and the Efta-States to a continental partnership with the EU to negotiate, which would bring the free trade without the free movement of persons?
If you are not in the EU, I would be in the sense of a second-best solution. As the Migration currently is possible, it leads inevitably to economic and political problems. If you can not bind the Migration in the social systems are different, also because the EU, for political reasons, the social inclusion principle, then that would be an emergency brake. The Problem of how the EU without the UK, however remained unresolved.

(editing Tamedia)

Created: 18.01.2019, 22:02 PM