European Union Should Extent Brexit (Article 50) Two Years. Without UK European Parliament Privileges!

Indeed, as I will explain more below, the European Parliament doesn’t create laws, just approve them. Great Britain is already out ot the European Council (which launches laws).

The House of Commons, the UK Parliament, rejected the UK government’s “Withdrawal Agreement from the European Union“, for the third time. According to the EU’s ultimatum to Great Britain, the UK will be thrown out of the EU on April 12, in 14 days. This expulsion is unwise, and no civilized way to proceed. I will thereafter suggest a different course: extending massively Article 50, putting Brexit on the European backburner, a slow simmer in the background, leaving time for Great Britain to figure out its existential issues, its Brexistential issues… Shile Europe is allowed to reconsider the future, the planet, civilization, progress, democracy, and other things which have disappeared from the Brexit debate…

The interminable Brexit process is paralyzing Europe (both UK and EU). The temptation is to expedite it, in the hope of being done with it. That will not work: instead, it will make the situation way worse. If Brexit happened on April 12, 2019, in two weeks, ten years of divisive negotiations would ensue. How to avoid that? Forget about it! Forget about Brexit, send it to the purgatory of the House of Commons, under the good care of its weaker, the excellent right honorable gentleman, Speaker John Bercow.

Another new NO, the ninth, was added on Friday. The Third No on the withdrawal agreement.


How And Why LEGALLY EXCLUDE the UK From The EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT (Until the UK Decides to Revoke Article 50, & Remain In the EU):

Europeans have to let the British Parliament find a solution and have it ratified by the British People, in a referendum. That will take at least a year. Meanwhile, the rest of the European Union has to protect itself from the pathology known as Brexit. That means that Great Britain should be EXCLUDED from taking part in the next European Parliament.

I don’t care what the legalistically minded come up with, mumbling that EU member nations have to be represented in Parliament, that we can’t have a precedent, bla bla bla. Right, the EU is very legally minded, a French characteristic, now permeating the EU. However, sticking to the law causes rigidities which, in turn can only be removed by those periodic revolutions shaking France.

The spirit of the law always beats the letter of the law. The letter of the law has already been broken: Article 50 extended only until tomorrow, March 29, 2019, the appartenunce of the UK in the EU.  Hence the letter of the law (24 months!) has been broken. Yet the spirit survives.

So, in a way, the UK is (sort of) out: the European Council, after one meeting with UK PM Cameron, four days after the fateful Brexit, never met as 28 members again: the UK got excluded. So the new spirit of the law is that the UK is partly out of the EU. The European Council is really the government of the EU (the European Commission just implements what the EC wants).

The European Council is more important than the European Parliament (European Parliament vote laws, but doesn’t suggest them). So, no EU Parliament for the UK. Instead UK in an indefinite Article 50: all rights and duties of membership, except for voting. In many democracies, convicts don’t vote for a while. Hey, Britain self-convicted.

The solution above, extending Article 50 by two years, but no Parliament for the UK, will free the EU from Brexit. The EU will be free to progress, pass laws mitigating plutocracy, climate change, foster research, education, etc. In particular financing of UK science and advanced tech by EU budgets will proceed. Also Eurosceptics will be informed that leaving the EU, and activating Article 50, has a democratic cost, and gives a forerun of what it means to be out of the EU: no more European legislating possible.  


And what will happen to Great Britain? Polls show the UK would vote for Remain at this point. Within two years, the British People will come to its senses, in spite of the shrill shrieking propaganda of its plutocratic media (the EU should pass laws to limit plutocratic propaganda). So We the British People will vote to stay in the EU. Then a special EU Parliament UK election can be held.

The non-participation of the UK in the EU Parliament will prevent Parliamentary sabotage, which would otherwise paralyze Europe some more. However, if legal minds of the stupid kind insist on having that… the fact is that Article 50 should be extended 2 years, while Speaker Bercow and the House of Commons figure Brexit out.

Why? No bad feelings, looking forward… In the end no Brexit.


Enough, children, who go by the self-glorifying name of “leaders”! Learn from history!

The British Parliament voted No No No No No No No No, No, on all the possibilities of Brexit, a wide spectrum selected by the very interesting Speaker Bercow. A European ultimatum expires April 12. On that date, Great Britain is supposed to have decided to leave, and how. (If if with a deal then the effective day will be in May.)

You may not know this, you children who are called leaders, because you studied just what was Politically Correct, but war is a serious thing, and a seriously sneaky thing. Apparently innocuous indifference and turning-away can turn into alienation, and war. The personal history of my family has helped me know these emotional truths. I was graced by a family which harbred resistance fighters, more than 100 Jews, which was chased by the Gestapo, while my dad arrived in France in combat, fighting Nazis… In my lifetime, I have known what it feels like to be bombed by fascist racists, and to have a young uncle who was an elder brother to me, killed by Islamist  terrorists (crucially helped by a double dealing French government).

Also I spent decades studying history, in particular of the European kind. It is not as simplistic as usually depicted. The first battle of Fontenoy (around 50,000 killed by arrows, lances, swords, and axes, in a few hours of hand to hand combat) was an enormous butchery, Franks against Franks. There was a second, even more famous battle, in the same place of Fontenoy, 1,000 years, a millennium, later, this time English against French. As one can see, French military history is rich, unparalleled… These two battles of Fontenoy were pretty much brothers against brothers, not civilization against savagery, and should never have happened.

Yes, Europe had plenty of civilization against savagery battles. France was involved in all of them (the Mongols gave up their conquest of Europe, when the top Mongol generals argued that the heavy losses they had suffered in Hungary were a foretaste of suffering again the same fate as their ancestors the Huns in France). In the Eight Century, the Franks repelled three invasions of Europe by the savage Arab Islamists, over a period of thirty years. Of course, Islam would never have happened if Catholic fascism had been defeated at the Battle of the Cold River, three centuries before Muhammad’s birth.  At the Cold River, the Western Emperor, Eugenius, a secular professor promoted by the head of the Occidental Roman army, Arbogast, confronted the catholic bigot, Oriental emperor Theodosius (originally a Spaniard). Arbogast, a Frank, controlled, for many years, a Roman army full of Romanized Franks. Theodosius was allied with the Goths. Theodosius and his goons had invented the notion of “heresy”, and laws, decrees, making “heresy” punishable at the pleasure of the government.

There is a direct line between this, and the government of Brunei establishing the death penalty for homosexuality in 2019, according to Sharia. Indeed, at the Cold River, the Frigidus river, unexpectedly, Arbogast was defeated and those who wanted heresy to be punishable by death, and Catholicism to pursue its reign of terror, won. Not only that, but, left without an army, the Occidental Roman empire promptly fell to the invading barbarian hordes, 14 years later (406 CE).

The millennium of European wars started when the French of West Francia turned their backs on the rest of the “Roman” empire (actually the west of present France, the most occidental third of the “Francia” of the Franks from 500 CE to 950 CE, including Paris had very good reasons to reject the empire… which had failed to protect them against the Viking; instead the count of Paris, soon to be duke, did the work, battling back from the ramparts, with 200 men, 10,000 bloody Vikings… while the Roman/Carolingian emperors prefered negotiations with the Viking). That turning of all French backs was, to some extent, justified. However it caused alienation between Europeans. By 1200, all of Europe was united against the French-Paris monarchy (and lost the battle and war against the “French” king Philippe Auguste, at Bouvines).


Treat The British Well, They Don’t Have To Be Too Punished, This Is Not Versailles:

The interminable Brexit is paralyzing Europe. The temptation is to expedite it. That would be a mistake for the British: once they inspect the situation in all details, they will come to the conclusion, except for a few vested interests, like plutocrats and media moguls, and the odd deluded fisher, that staying in the EU is the less bad of all bad possibilities.

I am of the opinion that Germany was treated very well by the Versailles Treaty (contrarily to common opinion). That’s because I studied the situation in details, and I didn’t buy the Nazi opinion about Versailles. However, there is definitively a risk of mistreating a deluded Britain about Brexit. OK, the British have the wrong mentality about the European Union. This is a particular bad case of “fake news”. Just like Islamophilia is a particularly bad case of “fake news”.

So yes, there is “fake news” problem. But does that mean that British or Muslims should be mistreated? As individuals? No. The problem is that Brexit would hurt most british and European citizens, So the rest of the European Union has to be patient.

Not having the UK NOT sit in the EU Parliament will have the advantage that a lot of laws of the pro-plutocratic, anti-federal, and unequal laws, in particular the monstrous British rebate, and the even more monstrous Swiss rebate, can be legislated out.

Yes, president Macron is understandably viewing this Brexit tragicomedy as something to flush down the toilet, ASAP. However, apparently innocuous and inconsequential acts in history have resulted in immense tragedies.

Don’t forget the present system in Britain was mostly created by a succession of French adventurers, warriors, magnates and plutocrats, with a few queens and duchesses in the mix (William of Normandy, the barons of Magna Carta, Eleanor d’Aquitaine, Yolande of Aragon, Isabelle de France, Edouard III/Edward III, Lancaster/Lancastre, de Montfort come to mind; the House of Normandy was succeeded by the House of Anjou). The estrangement between England and France was the fruit of personalities more than anything else. A striking example is Yolande of Aragon, who financed Joan of Arc’s army and the illegal kinglet (the “Dolphin”) connected to them, who got the “100 Years War” relaunched all by themselves. (Yes, now there is a lamentable cult of Joan of Arc amplifying that idiotic nationalism and bigotry.)

Small things can have big consequences: models supposedly show weather systems can be created by a butterfly flapping its wings, three weeks earlier.

Macron, the French president, doesn’t want to become that butterfly of doom, flapping Europe into division and thus oblivion. Macron doesn’t want to flap all wrong. Let Macron beat on French Yellow Jackets, if that’s his won, he does that well, the French love to be beaten up, so they can beat back. Revolutions make French law progress. But Macron shouldn’t beat on the British. That could lead to war.  

The European Union will be optimal if it acts as an empire of the highest aspirations. That includes, first of all, bending over backwards not to mistreat European Peoples or nations. Europe should focus its energy on thermonuclear fusion and the space race now engaged between the USA, China, India, maybe Russia to be first (back) on the Moon. (The European thermonuclear reactor JET is based in the UK, it’s crucial to ITER, and its financing has been compromised by Brexit.)

Oh, by the way, Boris Johnson, ex-mayor of London and co-leader of the Leave (the EU) campaign, voted for the EU Withdrawal Agreement of May, today (his colleague had adopted the same position a week ago). Why? Because for the UK to leave the EU without a deal is an unfathomable catastrophe.

So, question, if the Leave campaign leaders can be that reasonable, surely the European leaders should be? Or are the leaders of the European Council truly that childish that they risk European strategic disaster, medium term? Jut on the basis of legalistically justified resentment? 

Taking away Parliament from a EU country which has left the European Council, which originates European laws, only makes sense. Beating the Brits when they are down doesn’t. Give Great Britain time to rethink Europe. Two years. No Parliament.

Patrice Ayme



The opinion of the British on Brexit has already changed a bit. It will change some more. Hey, even the New York Times is realizing it had Trump Derangement Syndrome. Here is a New York Times editorial on Trump today:, operating a U-turn on its opinion of Trump:


“Maybe the president brilliantly played the media. Or maybe we just played ourselves.

By Bret Stephens,  Opinion Columnist

“Maybe we’ve had this all wrong.

Maybe Donald Trump isn’t just some two-bit con artist who lucked his way into the White House thanks to an overconfident opponent. Or a second-rate demagogue with a rat-like instinct for arousing his base’s baser emotions and his enemies’ knee-jerk reactions. Or a dimwit mistaken for an oracle, like some malignant version of Chauncey Gardiner from “Being There.”

Thanks to Robert Mueller, we know he isn’t Russia’s man inside, awaiting coded instruction from his handler in the Kremlin.

Maybe, in fact, Trump is the genius he claims to be, possessed — as he likes to boast — of a “very good brain.”


Here is the full statement from the European commissionfollowing the vote in the Commons.

The commission regrets the negative vote in the House of Commons today. As per the European council (article 50) decision on 22 March, the period provided for in article 50(3) is extended to 12 April. It will be for the UK to indicate the way forward before that date, for consideration by the European council.

A “no-deal” scenario on 12 April is now a likely scenario. The EU has been preparing for this since December 2017 and is now fully prepared for a “no-deal” scenario at midnight on 12 April. The EU will remain united. The benefits of the withdrawal agreement, including a transition period, will in no circumstances be replicated in a “no-deal” scenario. Sectoral mini-deals are not an option.

The final two sentences refer to a claim often made by Brexiters at Westminster that, in the event of a no-deal departure, the UK and the EU would in practice negotiate a series of mini-agreements to mitigate the worst consequences. This is sometimes referred to as a managed no deal.

Tags: , , ,

36 Responses to “European Union Should Extent Brexit (Article 50) Two Years. Without UK European Parliament Privileges!”

  1. benign Says:

    The EU was mal-designed, economically, from the start, to benefit the Germans, and the ECB is driving the nail into the coffin. The UK is fortunate never to have adopted the Euro, and now a no-deal Brexit is better than any continued association, as the EU is self-destructing. The populists are having no more of the EU, and it is not long before the banks take the EU down for good.

    As I have opined before, negative interest rates are an abomination, a crime against nature. Really, it is the banks that have destroyed the EU, on top of the mal-designed fiscal/monetary union, with no consolidated debt.

    In the US, we have the big-spending states (CA & IL, etc.) now suing to be given back their unfair tax deductions of state and local taxes against federal taxes, as their fiscal pain increases. They will probably fail, as the more prudent states have Trump and his Supreme Court on their side, presumably.

    But I feel your pain. It is tragic, what is happening to Europe. We’ll see if the USA can get back to following the Constitution its founders gave it. It may fracture on pretty much the same lines it did 160 years ago.


    • Gmax Says:

      Benign: Patrice gonna tell you you miss the big picture as she did already. Point being Europe is an union. I read England has lots of debts, and why is debt so important? You go see Trump and tell him he has too much debt. Or Pelosi? US debt is bigger than France


      • Patrice Ayme Says:

        Yes, US is growing faster than France… Like 3 times faster… and so is US debt… Both Pelosi and Trump obviously agree it’s a good thing… And I think they are right…


        • Patrice Ayme Says:

          In earlier version of this answer I had a nonsensical typo…The US GROWTH of its ECONOMY and the US growth of its DEBT are both THREE TIMES France at this point, and I don’t think that’s a coincidence. Sorry for the nonsensical typo earlier…


    • Patrice Ayme Says:

      The EU was NOT designed to benefit the “Germans”. It happened that way, under Merkel (CDU/CSU), because of Schroeder (SPD). Schroeder, since then fed by Putin to Siberian carry gas all over, was supposedly from the SPD, but he made hard-nosed right wing reforms which boosted German industry.
      Meanwhile, France made terrible mistakes: the right PM Balladur, under Mitterrand, privatized nationalized industries, Yeltsin style, giving the helms of companies to petulant, arrogant know-nothing from the “Grandes Ecoles”… who took all the wrong decisions.

      In particular, the high level political push for state of the art French technology, disappeared to be replaced by intellectual masturbation into Political Correctness full of racism, colonialism, anti-civilizationism, anti-historicism, anti-rationalism, anti-scientism, pseudo-socialism, etc. The harsh truth, though, is that France buys nearly all her energy outside. No energy, no France. France doesn’t have anymore enormous amount of hyper polluting lignite (the worst coal) as Germany has. France gets her uranium in Niger… Full of rabid Jihadists… And women having 8 children, average…

      The end result is that France’s state of the art industry fell off, while Germany concentrated on cars (I drive Bavarian cars in the US… especially after my Ford once exploded, smoking and losing steering and braking at 8,000 feet on a dangerous Sierra road…) Now those wonderful German cars are in the crosshairs of Musk, Trump, GM’s Barra, and general furious electrification…

      Italy’s industry stayed a basket case, above old medium scale companies of northern Italy… The UK’s great economic show was mostly smoke and mirrors propelled by EU laxism (now to be deflated).

      The French Cours des Comptes (equivalent to US OMB. Sort of Supreme Court of finance) came out with a scathing report of French high tech, 2 weeks ago, especially Ariane 6, which they see condemned by SpaceX, short term…


  2. Gmax Says:

    So you expect the Speaker of the Commons, John Bercow, to save the EU?
    Unlikely Eurocrats will go along, no?


  3. oatmealactivist Says:

    The referendum was a mistake. It delivered a mandate which neither the government nor the opposition (nor the radical fringe – looking at you, SNP) supported. The ongoing constitutional crisis is the result of this.

    The obvious solution: Norway. It would also allow Britain to exit the EU but remain in the Single Market and European Economic Area, leave the Customs Unions, abandon the (disastrous!) common agricultural policy, reject the European Court of Justice and manage its own immigration and customs policies.

    But the vote cannot simply be ignored. Parasitic elites like Tony Blair and Michael Heseltine and Nick Clegg have been slithering around the country, hissing that the referendum result can be ignored and that the UK will simply remain in the EU. If these politicians were wise, they’d realize that it is precisely this attitude – rooted in contempt for the public – that pushed the country to reject the EU.

    Magna Carta empowered a parliament to constrain a corrupt king. It’s time for another great charter to defend and preserve liberty.


  4. pshakkottai Says:

    The economy of money creating nations:

    GDP = govt created money + private money + net exports
    = govt created money + K* (govt money – tax) + net exports , K being a multiplication factor of the economy, typically 4 for USA and about 5 for India.

    Use of govt created money increases GDP. And only created money does it! You also observe tax reduces GDP. K is empirical and data is available in

    Govt created money is the ONLY positive source of economic expansion. Net exports is negative and is a sink (for India). The economy expands if more govt money is created whatever the mechanism, doubling the minimum wage, free universal income or free medicare or whatever. The basis of expansion is the factor K! Reduction of tax is equally good.

    Macroeconomics is a strange animal! Not intuitive and most people get it wrong.This is also called Monetary Sovereignty.

    The economy of money users is different :

    For people, businesses, corporations and states of the union or nations of Europe who have a common money but no political union it follows the familiar

    earned money (or taxes collected or bonds floated) + borrowed money = expenditure + savings.

    Deficits are restricted and created money is not shared and all entities need income, salary or profits or taxes. Europe is in that class.

    Expansion of economy is only due to govt created money and the multiplier K, a measure of transactions of money changing hands.

    Interest rates and inflation are not important.


    • Patrice Ayme Says:

      Thanks Partha! OK, first tech question here: what do you mean by “government”?????
      In the US, “private” (mostly “money center”) banks create money by extending credit. Now, right those giant banks are quasi-government: they compose actually half of the Central Bank (“FRED”) seats… So one has to include them, no?


      • pshakkottai Says:

        Generally govt owns the central bank and is for its owners “we the people” except in USA with half private representation and special dividends to owners. All money goes to the people (except small dividends). In other countries (like India) it is strictly to the people. In USA, the private part of the central bank has too much power and they call it the Federal Reserve Bank to mislead the people.

        Private banks are allowed money creation too but this money sums to zero at all times being composed of loans and deposits equal and opposite, one man’s loan being equal to another deposit (even including the large fractional reserve amplification of money). This bank-created money does not affect the macroeconomic balance. It just churns the economy. The interest banks get is also govt created (high powered money) and supports plutocracy. The only way to avoid is to maximize state ownership and minimize private ownership of all banks. India is much better than USA in this aspect, there being many state banks.

        There is only one state bank in USA, North Dakota.


        • Patrice Ayme Says:

          Hi Partha:
          I don’t understand this:
          “Private banks are allowed money creation too but this money sums to zero at all times being composed of loans and deposits equal and opposite, one man’s loan being equal to another deposit (even including the large fractional reserve amplification of money)”

          I thought precisely that, in the present system, banks could lend enormous amounts of money that they didn’t have… amplification of the fractional reserve, precisely… At some point it was 3% deposits, and lending thirty times that… Without amplification of fractional reserve, banks could only lend what’s deposited… Like in the Old West….


          • pshakkottai Says:

            The way it works is banks are allowed to create $1 credit for $1 deposit (in the old days) and now about $10 by fractional reserve expansion. This money stays till the loan is paid off a few years for consumer loans and 30 years for home mortgages. When the loan is paid off the deposit disappears too. In the macroeconomy lots of loans are being written and killed every day and the net is zero. (Most loans are designed to be repaid monthly with principals of a small amount and every payments reduces 10 times the deposit.) But the banks collect interest which is govt created high-powered money. Over the period of existence of this loan, the banks get interest, the total being very substantial.This money goes to the owners.
            The payback for a loan is on the order of the principal for home loans. No wonder the banking industry is as rich as the sum of all homes owned by homeowners divided by probably 10, the number of years.


          • Patrice Ayme Says:

            Dear Partha: Thanks, that was very clear. So ultimately it’s the central bank which pay the private owners of the banks for lending to other privates (… their friends).
            So how does it differ in India? If the bank is not private, but government, the interest rate acts like a tax of the government onto itself?


          • pshakkottai Says:

            Hi Patrice: Not very much from USA but there are more State Banks. There are no debt limits, no filibusters and sometimes projects are directly funded by deficits (created zero-cost money) and govt does not hesitate to fund commonwealth items. Minerals are govt owned and are leased to private outfits. Railways are also nationalized. In general more social items compared to USA.
            USA has a lot of influence on the Indian economy because India can’t ignore USA’s ridiculous restrictions on foreign debts etc which are wrong but the Chicago School of Economics has substantial representation. For example the debt/GDP, the non-sensical ratio.
            The interest rate is a minor item. When scaled to GDP, interest rate control of inflation has a minor effect.


  5. Patrice Ayme Says:

    Problem is that some in the EU are now determined to kick Brexiters out… As Article 50 has been activated. So here is my solution; it makes sense when one realizes EU Parliament only approves laws directed by European Council (of democratic leaders):


  6. benign Says:

    Maybe if all EU members backed off and took a Norway deal it might be easier to proceed. The fundamental problems with the currency would go away at least and they could sort out governance. Network theory says that among large networks those that are sparsely connected are most stable.

    Re: debt: the whole world has too much >= 300% of world GDP by most estimates. What seems clear is that the central banking model that has spread since the Fed was initiated is part of the problem. My understanding of the “excess reserves” held in abundance in EU and US are just the bad (unpayable) debts of the banks that they wish to hide without penalty at a fraudulent valuation at the CB–and even get paid to do so in the US!

    Several analysts I admire suggest the only way forward is a massive debt-to-equity swap, in recognition that a jubilee will never happen with the power the banks and their minions the politicians have (the dual roots of the problem are when the interests of bankers and politicians diverge from the public interest)…. Economist Michael Hudson chronicles the recognized necessity for jubilees from ancient times, when the king, not the bankers, ruled, and a new king would discharge the debts built up in the last regime.


    • pshakkottai Says:

      Two key equations in economics:
      Federal Deficits – Net Imports = Net Private Savings
      Gross Domestic Product = Federal Spending + Private Investment and Consumption – Net Imports

      Federal Deficits_A –Net ImportsA_B = Net Private Savings_A, for nation A.

      Federal Deficits_B –Net ImportsB_A= Net Private Savings_B, for nation B. Add the two to get

      Deficits_A +Ddeficits_B = Net private Savings_A + Net Private savings_B, so the trade term cancels out. If you do this for all nation pairs, the mutual trade deficits cancel out.

      There is zero external debt for all nations combined.

      There is no debt otherwise. The “debt” is nothing but created money, a misnomer.

      The world debt is an illusion.


      • pshakkottai Says:

        The last step is
        Federal deficits of all nations = Net private savings of all nations. or
        Created money of the world = net private savings of all people of the world!


    • Patrice Ayme Says:

      Norway is nothing. Norway takes orders from the EU, just as Switzerland does, and just as Britain would, if it got out of the EU. BTW, I am for bringing the Swiss payment to Norwegian levels (per capita, fo course). Brexit would be an excellent occasion to knock off the British rebate, which enables Britain to pay less than Italy (a country with a smaller economy per capita, and a population 12% less).

      The EU was created mostly by the French Republic, accepting unconditional surrender of Germanoid fascism in all its aspects. The process is ongoing: Germany recently aligned its nationality laws on the French model, and instituted a minimum wage and attached laws quasi identical to the French… Reciprocally, more people in France are suggesting for France to adapt some German trade union rules which are more advanced.

      I would have no problem the EU being a kind of Franco-German duopoly… and actually the EU does well when this happens. Right now Macron is leading the charge, but his German poodle Merkel is in need of a diet, rather exhausted, and aspiring to the retirement she announced… Also German industry is having a Trump/China problem… While France is proving inept to exploit her own scientific breakthrough… as usual, but even more than usual: AI being the latest example….


    • Patrice Ayme Says:

      Are you a French intellectual of the politico-economic type? The French stress out about debt. Last they did this big time, was in the 1930s, and they had a big fight with the yankees about that, starting in 1933, resulting in FDR hating the French even more than he did before… Hence France couldn’t engage in timely war with Adolf Hitler. having both the US and UK against her… All of this because france wanted to insure the value of money, and nobody else wanted to.

      Obsessing about debt is costing the EU and France in particular, a lot. Were I European dictator, I would sink the Euro… Not deliberately, but by extending much more carefully targeted debt. For example, I would order the franco-German to prepare a EURO DEMO, a hooked up to the grid thermonuclear reactor. And if it cost a trillion Euros, never mind. Even five trillion Euros, let’s go. (It would probably cost more like 200 billion euros…) DEMO is planned, but after the West Antarctic iceshelf has melted… bringing up sea levels several meters, and costing more than DEMO, in Europe alone…

      What the French don’t get about debt, the Japanese long understood: debt is, at worst, deferred taxes… in a sovereign state (like Japan!).
      OK, they got it a bit as they are running French debt a bit above 3.5% (above the EU limit). Meanwhile Obama-Trump-Pelosi correctly couldn’t care less about debt…

      Is all debt innocuous? No! Private equity debt is a problem now.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Patrice Ayme Says:

      FDR wiped out much of the banking system in 1933, and a huge amount of debt… Russia never paid back significantly the “emprunt Russe”…. Etc. So “jubilees” happen in modern times… The “Norway” deal is better for Norway than no EU, but is way worse than EU membership, as Norway has less influence on EU laws than Malta or Luxembourg… Norway pays as much per capita as a regular wealthy EU member… As it should. Now some in the UK want to join Norway, and Iceland, but that’s not going to happen… Iceland remembers the fish war with Britain, 30 years ago, a nonsense the EU stopped…


    • Patrice Ayme Says:

      Here Corbyn spoke well, Thursday, March 28 2019:
      “Corbyn said: “The absolute priority at the moment is to end this chaos the government has brought us to by their endlessly running down the clock and basically bullying and threatening people. The bullying hasn’t worked, the threats haven’t worked. It’s time now for the sensible people to take over.”

      He cautioned: “This is a very dangerous period, because if we crash out without a deal then the supply chains get interrupted, jobs are at stake, and also the sense of security of many EU nationals living in Britain, and of course British people living across Europe.”

      Labour would propose a deal involving a customs union with the EU to prevent the return of a hard border in Northern Ireland, Corbyn said.

      “We are working very hard on that and reaching out to people all across the Commons, and I have been doing that all this week and obviously I’ll be doing that all this weekend,” he added.

      “However people voted in the referendum, no one voted to lose their jobs, no one voted to be worse off, and no one voted to deregulate our society.

      “I think the obvious choice is the one I suggested, which would be a good economic relationship with Europe that could be negotiated. I’m convinced of that after spending a lot of time meeting with and talking to officials in Europe.””


  7. benign Says:

    Just to make it clear: the problem is, like, Jamie Dimon saying that the economy is not working for poor people while his bank is systematically moving out of lower income households, and still paying ~.02% interest on deposits when market rates are ~2%.


    • Patrice Ayme Says:

      That the big banks are evil and instruments of the wealthiest is what I have said forever… That’s actually how they create money… for all… by lending to the wealthiest….
      That is precisely why one needs massive government spending where said private banks won’t step in…


      • pshakkottai Says:

        Hi Patrice: Bank money does not count in the macroeconomy but private banks get a lot of govt created high powered money (also called Vertical money which is created from thin air and is not limited by someones savings) as interest. This is what supports plutocracy.The amount of interest is quite large being a few % GDP.
        More govt banks are needed to put down this evil. Of course more spending on the commons is a must.


  8. Patrice Ayme Says:

    “Brussels” is not a government. The European Commission tries to turn into laws decisions of the European Council of the democratically elected European leaders. Those laws have to be approved by the European Parliament. Small place, Europe, no bigger than the US West.


    • Chris Snuggs Says:

      The problem is that Brussels WANTS to be a government, THINKS it is a government and BEHAVES as if it were a government. GOVERNMENTS have armies, which the EU is desperately trying to create. Governments have a fiscal union, which they would dearly like to import. COUNTRIES have free movement, which they have managed to install. Governments have Foreign Ministries, which the EU set up a a cost of EIGHT BILLION EUROS and counting. The Maastricht and Lisbon treaties were designed to push Europe further along the federalisation path.

      The EU has a psychiatric identity crisis, but with the unusual and added luxury that its victims are financing its delusions to a HORRENDOUS extent; in the case of Britain, THIRTY MILLION EUROS PER DAY, not counting the fish and all the rest.
      Sorry, Patrice, but the EU is fascist, because a KEY element of fascism is an elite trying to force onto the plebs a policy to which NONE OF THE LATTER HAS EVER DEMOCRATICALLY CONSENTED. It REALLY is that simple.

      I don’t care HOW small Europe is. SINGAPORE manages FINE on its own. For defence, we have NATO – until of course your idiot Macron destroys it and in the next war against China, Russia or the lunatics in Iran the Yanks tell us to FO, having been slagged off once too often by the hideous EU leadership. I would rather be a state of the USE than associated with teh people running the EU.


      • Patrice Ayme Says:

        The EU is indeed fascist, the European Council is a fascist gathering of the fascist leaders of their fascists, so-called representative democracies, little more than oligarchies which embraced the ironically denominated “liberal” order. However the UK is also a fascist plutocratic system. Singapore is a fascist fleck, depending for its defense, upon the immense backbones of much larger allies (Australia, UK, France, USA and their allies… such as Vietnam…). Militarily, the UK is presently a kind of extension of the US, armed mostly from 3 Trident II class subs (the 4th was nuclearly decommissioned)… Although 2 enormous (and vulnerable) carriers are coming on line…

        What Europe should do is to try to emulate the Swiss Constitution as much as possible, with plenty of referendums… At all levels… Just like CALIFORNIA. Also roll back the plutocracy which in particular uses the media as propaganda outfits…. In any case instituting old national barriers is not the way forward, it’s just the way backward, to old fashion war…


  9. pshakkottai Says:

    I thought it would be useful to show this plot which is similar to that of other nations monetary sovereign or otherwise

    This is for France, not monetary Sovereign but could be if it allowed unrestricted deficits.


  10. Chris Snuggs Says:

    “The Guardian”? LEFTARD ESTABLISHMENT drivel.


    • Patrice Ayme Says:

      I just used the cover of The Guardian… I don’t think they are left… They are confused,,, They censor me for being a Muslim (!!!)… They told me that: I “blogged the Qur’an”, they informed me… while Pakistan put a fatwa on me, hahaha… The worst retards are not aware of their condition….


  11. Patrice Ayme Says:

    [To The Hill.]

    The EU should give a 2 year extension to Great Britain. As the UK is already a non-voting EU member, it should not take part in the EU Parliament (which approves the implementation by the EC of laws suggested by the European Council of EU elected leaders). Within 2 years the Brits will determine that EU membership is less bad of all possible solutions!


  12. Martian Ambassador Says:

    To Tyranosopher:
    Nope. Out means out.


    • Patrice Ayme Says:

      Brexit is a sheer insanity, as the House of Commons is discovering painstakingly. All potential alternatives are worse than EU membership. News for the geographically challenged, and other “Martian Ambassador”: Great Britain is not located on Mars. Out means out of it in the sense of insanity, as when somebody is “out of it”. Great Britain is in Europe, just like Nazi Germany was, and screaming racist, alienating insanities , will not change that geographical fact. It will just change the amount of force necessary to impose civilized behavior on the lunatics.


  13. Patrice Ayme Says:

    [Sent to Times.]

    The whole idea of many a Brexiter was, out of resentment, to destroy things, harmony, comfort, certainty, and the feeling that Europe was a home for all.

    On the part of controlling plutocrats, Brexit, which they enforced through massive disinformation and hate campaigns, the whole idea of Brexit was to weaken the European Union, in the hope that the latter would be distracted enough to forget about cracking down on global plutocracy, its tax evasion, and manipulation of the media.

    For those actors, Brexit is working as intended. And the more destruction and distraction Brexit brings, the more it works.


What do you think? Please join the debate! The simplest questions are often the deepest!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: