12 Jul 2016 14:46, from Robert Bashe -> Richard Menedetter:
RM>> When dealing with the EU I got always the impression that the sole RM>> purpose is to get the best deal for the UK, no matter what. RB> And that was _not_ the case for every other EU country?
No, not to that extent.
RB> Come on, every country is out to get the best possible deal for RB> itself.
Yes ... but there is a difference between short sighted action, and long term action.
As a company you can either invest in R&D or not. For the short term it is counter productive to do so. You money is spent, but you do not have an immediate product that you can sell.
It was the same with the marshall plan. In the short term it was just money spent fpr the USA. In the long term they got back their money manyfold.
RB> The government owes that to its voters and constitution.
No ... the government owes them that they explain the advantages and disadvantages as clearly and objectively as possible.
That was not the case for the referendum in the UK. It was a populistic "let's show them" campaign, and nobody had a plan what to do if it really succeeds. It seems nobody expected it to suceed.
RB> No country will ignore its own interests in the name of an idealistic RB> Europe - and if it does, and the voters notice it, the government will RB> be voted out at the next election.
The question is how far seeing the politics is. In the end it will be positive for the prosperity of the country.
But if you only focus on short ter monetary loss, and do not highlight the benefits that you get in return, then that is sad.
CU, Ricsi
--- GoldED+/LNX * Origin: Feel good? Don't worry; you'll get over it! (2:310/31)
