MvdV>> No doubt that the UK will be worse off after a Brexit.
BF> Financially speaking, the UK is a net contributor to the EU BF> economy.
Ah, the "net contributor argument". I wondered when that would come up. Yes the UK is a net contributor. Obviously not all 28 EU countries can be net receivers. And since they are not all exactly equal, they will not all be zero net contributors. There will always be net contributors and net receivers. And OF COURSE the richest countries will be the net contributors.
BF> So our UK brethren may have a point,
No, it is false logic. What they forget is that being in the EU gives a big boost to the economy, so that they have much more money to spend. When they leave, they will no longer be net contributors, but the economy will decline and the bottom line will be that they have less money to spend. What matters is not how much one contributes to the EU, but how much will be left to spend after making the membership contribution.
I bet you are a net contributor to the Swedish State, My estimate is that you pay more taxes than what you receive on dole, subsidies and whatever money from the state.
OTOH, there are people in Sweden who are net receivers. They are the people that for one erason or another are unable to get an income of their own. The unployed, the sick, the disabled. Would you swap with one of those "leeches" so that you are no longer a net contributor?
BF> and I think it's unfair to call them the bad boy in our union.
BF> As Ward and I often have agreed upon, a North European Union would BF> benefit us tremendously.
Perhaps. But within that "New Union" there would still be net contributors and net receivers. Or "leeches" in your words. What will be the next step? Should we do another round and kick out the new "leeches"?
We may end up with the city states we had in the middle ages...
And then... a good life is more than just money...
