#Brexit #Lexit – Research to show EU is the source of #Austerity and Debt in Europe

One example to demonstrate the EU-dictatorship over Europe:
France needs austerity, Juncker tells mayors: http://www.euractiv.com/section/euro-finance/news/france-needs-austerity-juncker-tells-mayors/

Summary of the global Smash-And-Grab Bank power-grab

Further to prior articles on the main political reasons why voting for Brexit on the 23rd of June is the only rational choice, in this entry we examine the social-economic reasons why Brexit would result in saving millions of lives in the UK, or conversely, how the choice to Remain in EU would keep UK on the path of steady and certain downturn in every sense. In such regard, this post is a continuation of a recently reblogged article: Hard figures to prove UK is better off with #Brexit: exposing the Remain camp’s scare tactics.

Before exploring the details, it is worth taking a quick look at the ACTUAL agenda behind the world-wide and EU-wide imposed Austerity, Debt and Crisis – the global power-grab Bank-agenda masked as ‘economic necessity’:

The premise of the scheme is a sequence of imposed fraudulent IMF-loans generating odious public Debt (Fraud) upon the allegation that there is Crisis in a country (Hoax).
Contrary to popular myth, these Loans are not withdrawn from any pre-existing funds – every time when Banks lend to any individual, business or government they create NEW MONEY for the purpose.
Then the generated public Debt is used as “reason” for imposing Austerity which then triggers real economic Crisis (Smash) in the given country.
To allegedly alleviate the real Crisis, more IMF-loans are imposed with the binding obligation of the country to continue Austerity (more Smash) and by the obligation to allow the “creditor” Banks to seize all countries’ values, resources, lands, etc. via Privatisation (Grab).

That is, all assets of the planet are about to ‘return’ to those who impose these loans: the Bankers.

• Note: Andrew Mellon (US banker, Secretary of the Treasury 1921-32) once famously said, ‘In a crisis, assets return to their rightful owners’ (i.e. to the Banks).

NHS will be ‘KILLED OFF’ if Britain remains in the EU (USE)

According to a recent Express article revealing the direct connection between EU-membership and the bleak prospects of NHS, NHS will be ‘KILLED OFF’ in the case Britain remains in the EU:

The term “free trade” in the context of both EU and TTIP is a grossly misleading term – in fact these agreements are the exact opposite of what the expression of “freedom of trade” covers. Conservative MP Peter Lilley opposes TTIP exactly because he believes in free trade:

The more closely I look at it, the more parts of it worry me. Conservatives who believe in free trade should be very wary about endorsing TTIP. And both the Leave and Remain campaigns should look very carefully at its implications for our EU membership.

TTIP is not primarily about removing tariffs and quotas. … It is mainly about harmonising product specifications and creating a special regime for investment.
My three main concerns relate to the Investor-State Dispute Settlement System (ISDS). This creates a system of tribunals – special courts – in which large foreign companies can sue governments (but not vice-versa) for pursuing policies which harm their investments.

US companies could sue the UK government should it want to take back into the public sector privately provided services in the NHS, education, and so forth – or open fewer services to private provision.

Under TTIP, a foreign operator could have sued for massive compensation at the expense of our local NHS. Conservatives have rightly been cautious and pragmatic about the extent of private provision particularly in health. It would be electorally disastrous if we back a system which turns out to bring in privatisation by the back door.

These tribunals give foreign multinationals their own privileged legal system, too costly for smaller foreign companies (since the average case costs $8 million), and from which UK companies are excluded. Moreover, the ‘judges’ are commercial lawyers who, when not serving on a Tribunal, work for, and are therefore sympathetic to, big companies. Cases are heard largely in secret.

The “Stabilisation Clause” protects all investments made under the treaty for at least 20 years. A recent legal treatise explains how this undermines parliamentary democracy by binding future parliaments. Of course, the UK enters into other long term treaties and contracts – but our government can always renegotiate or, in the last resort, resile from them.

(Source: Yes, I believe in free trade. But here’s why we must protect our NHS from TTIP)

In the next sections we rely on a variety of sources to show that UK’s austerity and neoliberal policies such as the privatisation of NHS are derived directly from the EU-level economic policy. These are all outcomes of EU’s fiscal consolidation under the binding Lisbon Treaty / EU Constitution that converted the EU into USE in 2007-08.

Poverty and Inequality as outcomes of Austerity

Hard evidence regarding the direct link between Austerity and Poverty and Inequality is provided by an Oxfam Case Study from 2013: THE TRUE COST OF AUSTERITY AND INEQUALITY UK Case Study:

This shift towards market-based capitalism was characterized by financial liberalization, the erosion of social security and deregulation of the labour market.
However, these reforms have led to a dramatic increase in the number of people living in poverty, which almost doubled, from 7.3 million people in 1979 to 13.5 million in 2008, and inequality reached levels last seen in the 1920s, driven by a growing share of income going to the richest, in particular the top one per cent.

Economic stagnation, the rising cost of living, cuts to social security and public services, falling incomes, and rising unemployment have combined to create a deeply damaging situation in which millions are struggling to make ends meet.

Just one example among many is the unprecedented rise in the need for emergency food aid, with at least half a million people using food banks each year The Institute for Fiscal Studies found that the net direct effect of the coalition government’s tax and benefit changes will be to increase both absolute and relative poverty.

There is also continuing evidence that the very richest are faring much better since the economic crisis.  At the
very top, Britain’s richest 1,000 individuals saw their wealth increase by £138bn in real terms between 2009 and 2013.  Even measures designed to stimulate the economy have resulted in significant gains for the richest
– the richest five per cent of households hold 40 per cent of the assets that increased in value as a direct result of quantitative easing. All the while, the poorest tenth are taking home even less.

The predicted figures indicate an even bleaker future for the UK:

Over the decade to 2020, an additional 800,000 children are expected to be living in poverty – almost one in four British children.

The source of Austerity in Europe is the EU

All EU-member states are obliged to implement economic policy in accordance with the integrated guidelines of the so called “Lisbon Strategy“.

Economic reforms in the goods, capital and labour markets which remove barriers to competition and increase market flexibility are essential for the smooth functioning of the Economic and Monetary Union (EMU).

The economic reform agenda for Europe has been laid down in the so-called Lisbon Strategy for Growth and Jobs. In this context, the EU Heads of State or Government (European Council) launched a wide-ranging and ambitious programme of economic, social and environmental reforms in March 2000 covering policies at both the national and the EU level

The institutional framework for implementing the Lisbon Strategy consists mainly of two processes spelled out in Articles 121 and 148 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU). These pertain to the EU Council of Ministers’ adoption of Broad Economic Policy Guidelines (BEPGs) and Employment Guidelines (EGs) , which are proposed by the European Commission and cover macroeconomic, microeconomic and employment policies.

Above guidelines are binding for all EU-member states and are imposed all over EU by the UNELECTED European Commission, by a group of individuals elected by no one on any level, and whom no one can remove. Since the EU is de facto USE functioning as one country, every major decision, including economic (fiscal and monetary) policy is applicable to all its states, UK included.

Once UK would move into the Eurozone in the future, as per the projected full EU_integration, matters would get even worse:

The case for structural economic reforms is very strong in a monetary union, such as the euro area, since there are no longer national monetary and exchange rate policies to respond to country-specific shocks and to improve competitiveness.

A Guardian article: sheds light onto the fact that Austerity and its devastating consequences are EU-wide phenomena: Austerity pushing Europe into social and economic decline, says Red Cross

The social impact is immense, the study found. In Greece and Spain adult children with families are moving back in with their parents, several generations are living in single households with one breadwinner between them. It is now a common sight to find formerly prosperous middle-class men and women sleeping rough in Milan, Italy’s financial capital.

Youth unemployment figures in a quarter of the countries surveyed ranged from 33% to more than 60%. But as destructive to families, the report said, is the soaring jobless levels among 50-64 year-olds which has risen from 2.8 million to 4.6 million in the EU between 2008 and 2012.

“The rate at which unemployment figures have risen in the past 24 months alone is an indication that the crisis is deepening, with severe personal costs as a consequence, and possible unrest and extremism as a risk. Combined with increasing living costs, this is a dangerous combination,” the study said.

The conclusions of a scholarly article point at a direct correlation between the EU-level economic and political integration and inequality:

As Western European states have grown more deeply integrated into the regional polity of the European Union, and as national markets have opened to more intense international competition, income inequality has risen. This relationship between regional integration and income inequality appears net of statistical controls for other factors which have been offered as explanations for the “Great U-turn” on inequality, including economic development, welfare retrenchment, union decline, unemployment, corporatism, and, most prominently, globalization. Both the political and economic dimensions of regional integration are associated with income inequality, supporting the argument that both the expansion of economic competition and the deepening of political institutionalization matter for inequality.

From the above it becomes clear, regardless of which UK Government – Tory or other – introduces “reforms” such as cutting government spending and privatising the NHS, these are neither UK nor Tory-specific measures but all are part of an EU-level policy.

Guardian: ‘Recessions can hurt, but austerity kills’

Poorer public health … is not an inevitable consequence of economic downturns, it amounts to a political choice – by the government of the country concerned or, in the case of the southern part of the eurozone, by the EU, European Central Bank and IMF troika.
The most extreme case, says Stuckler, reeling off numbers he knows now by heart, is Greece. “There, austerity to meet targets set by the troika is leading to a public-health disaster,” he says. “Greece has cut its health system by more than 40%. As the health minister said: ‘These aren’t cuts with a scalpel, they’re cuts with a butcher’s knife.'”
The country’s healthcare system itself has also “signally failed to manage or cope with the threats it’s facing”, Stuckler notes. “There have been heavy cuts to many hospital sectors. Places lack surgical gloves, the most basic equipment. More than 200 medicines have been destocked by pharmacies who can’t pay for them. When you cut with the butcher’s knife, you cut both fat and lean. Ultimately, it’s the patient who loses out.”

Such phenomena, he says, “are just a few of many effects we’re seeing. And with all this accumulation of across-the-board, eye-watering statistics, there’s a cause-and-effect relationship with austerity measures. These issues became apparent not when the recession hit Greece, but with austerity.”

(Source: ‘Recessions can hurt, but austerity kills’ http://www.theguardian.com/society/2013/may/15/recessions-hurt-but-austerity-kills)

And who are the ultimate instigators of Austerity?

Who are these lenders demanding austerity?  The globally active financial enterprises — mostly banks that collapsed in the crisis and were rescued by their home governments — are, together, also major lenders to those governments.  Banks own their own governments’ debts but also other governments’ debts.  For example, major banks in France and Germany are among the Greek government’s chief creditors.  US banks and related financial enterprises hold significant amounts of other governments’ debts and other nations’ banks own much US government debt.
(Source: Austerity: Why and for Whom? – by Harvard-Stanford-Yale trained economics professor Richard D. Wolff: http://www.rdwolff.com/content/austerity-why-and-whom)

In a Guardian article same renowned economics professor points out how governments on both Left and Right pursue the same Austerity-agenda:

Center-right governments in Britain and Germany do it. So do the center-left governments in France and Italy. Obama and the Republicans do it, too. They all impose “austerity” programs on their economies as necessary to exit the crisis afflicting them all since 2007. Politicians and economists impose austerity now much as doctors once stuck mustard plasters on the skins of the sick. … With few exceptions, major political parties everywhere have imposed capitalism’s two-step hustle.
(Source: The great austerity shell game http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/nov/04/great-austerity-shell-game)

The rising wave of privatisation damages healthcare in Europe

Again, the burning urgency to save a country’s national healthcare system – and the public sphere as such – from the country’s looting elites, is NOT a UK-specific issue. These tendencies are shared on global scale, as all are rooted in the global neoliberal “project” – called “smash and grab” by Michael Hudson economist – which is pursued by the political elites all over the world, on both “Left” and Right. And EU is a Europe-wide enforcer of this global agenda. (On the global neoliberal project see podcast of professor David Harvey.)

The following article explains how all EU-countries are subjected to a process of eliminating the public health sector,
“which are presented by the Commission as a viable way to reduce government spending” (!) – a process that leads to subjecting NHS to further destruction under higher level fiscal integration via PPP, TTIP, TISA and CETA:

The austerity policies pursued in several European countries in the wake of the EU fiscal crisis are pushing the public health sector to the brink – and forcing more and more services into private hands, writes Jan Willem Goudriaan on World Health Day (7 April).
Jan Willem Goudriaan is General Secretary of the European Public Service Union (EPSU).

Deep cuts to government spending have been coupled with a widespread commercialisation and marketisation of health and social care. Large chunks of these services are being opened out to the market, allowing private enterprises and multinational corporations to bid for contracts from which huge profits can be made.

But the desire of commercial providers to find new business avenues into the health and social service sector is facilitated by the European Commission’s own policy frameworks, too.

Increasing support is being shown for transnational markets and public-private partnerships (PPPs) in health and social care – through policy, EU legislation and financial assistance – which are presented by the Commission as a viable way to reduce government spending. This, despite the fact that the majority of PPPs rely on a stream of ever-increasing income from governments – a factor which the Commission itself recognises.

The UK’s Private Finance Initiative (PFI) scheme, whose model is being rolled out across Europe with gleeful encouragement by the European Commission, has in its nearly 25-year history shown no evidence of being a cheaper, more efficient or innovative method of providing public services.

Rather, PFI has been associated in the NHS with service cutbacks, hospital closures and spiraling debts for hospitals. Nowhere is this more evident than in south London, which was placed in administration in 2012 after losing £1.3 million per week and where PFI deals have cost the NHS Trust £69 million per year – £61 million on interest alone.

Of particular concern is the recent trade negotiations on agreements such as TTIP, TISA and CETA which could further open up healthcare for competition and hand a bigger role to private commercial providers, financial investors and insurance companies.

Source: “The rising wave of privatisation damages healthcare in Europe” (http://www.euractiv.com/section/health-consumers/opinion/the-rising-wave-of-privatisation-damages-healthcare-in-europe/)

The EU uses the ‘eurocrisis’ as alibi to push privatisation

In another article we are presented with an example of how the “European Union uses eurocrisis as alibi to push privatisation of water services” (http://corporateeurope.org/2012/05/european-union-uses-eurocrisis-alibi-push-privatisation-water-services):

Jan Willem Goudriaan, deputy secretary general of the European Federation of Public Service Unions (EPSU), tells the story of how the EU sought to brush away a clear no of the Italian people against water privatisation but how this failed as a result of strong campaigning by the broad and vibrant Italian Water Movement.

Mass demonstrations, general strikes, the occupy movements and the actions of the indignados have repeatedly brought millions to the streets since 2008 to protest at the austerity policies in Europe. These policies which include the privatisation of public companies and services are supposed to deal with growing state deficits and debts.

On the 23rd of June when we vote in an EU-referendum it is essential to remember the title of above article: the EU use the so-called “eurocrisis” to push privatisation. The term ‘alibi’ is the key term to express what’s going on in essence. As it is explained in formerly referenced post, this alibi is crafted for the very purpose to be used as a pretext for the global corporatist Smash and Grab agenda imposing austerity and privatisations all over Europe and the West.

• A resounding Brexit vote would remove UK from the privatisation-imposing EU-control, thus would save the NHS and NHS would save millions of lives in the UK.

The EU is central part of the global neoliberal (Tory) agenda

In each EU-state, both Left and Right-wing governments have been implementing a version of the same anti-Labour policy that has led to unprecedented poverty and inequality in the UK. An obvious case in point is Greece’s “Left-wing” Syriza, which evidently obeys the diktats of EU and Troika when driving its constituency into abject poverty.

Another case in point is the ongoing crisis in France, where a dispute between the “socialist” French-lead and the country’s largest union over “reforms” of employment law has sparked massive protests across the country. One can hardly call any government Left-wing if such government is in dispute with the Labour union and triggers country-wide unrest of its very own constituency.

These so-called “reforms” – in fact diktats by the 1% for the 1% – introduced by the UK, France, Greece or any other EU-state, are integral elements of the EU-level fiscal consolidation. In addition to the shared fiscal policy on EU-level, the full list of state functions under the current USE-level integration has been given in a former post.

Due to the fiscal integration under the EU/USE, the privatisation and disarrangement of the NHS, UK’s reckless spending cuts, the gradual elimination of healthcare, social care and welfare, is a “national package” that all EU-member states are obliged to comply with as per the respective guidelines of the EU Constitution (Lisbon Treaty), where the expression of “competitiveness to ensure growth” means its exact opposite: top-level monopolisation and measures to contract national economies:

Article 126:

Member States shall avoid excessive government deficits.
The Commission shall monitor the development of the budgetary situation and of the stock of government debt in the Member States with a view to identifying gross errors. In particular it shall examine compliance with budgetary discipline on the basis of the following two criteria:

If a Member State persists in failing to put into practice the recommendations of the Council, the Council may decide to give notice to the Member State to take, within a specified time limit, measures for the deficit reduction which is judged necessary by the Council in order to remedy the situation.

In such a case, the Council may request the Member State concerned to submit reports in accordance with a specific timetable in order to examine the adjustment efforts of that Member State.

The shared economic policy imposed by EU as the alleged “adjustment efforts” to “handle” the very crisis that are inflicted by EU itself, include the following measures:

Privatisation of – selling out to foreign private ownership – a country’s central bank and commercial banks
Privatisation of a country’s healthcare system and all essential public services
Reducing/eliminating government-spending in vital areas such as education, welfare, affordable housing etc. (while Government-spending on war is always allowed!)
Acceptance of the EU-imposed IMF or Fed loans
Acceptance of the EU-imposed Bank-bailouts and Bail-ins
Major tax-cuts for the richest 1%, for the foreign large banks and corporations
Introducing overly exploitative labour-law (eg workfare, zero-hour contracts)
Reducing/eliminating pension and increasing tax-burden for the lower income segments
Reducing/eliminating unemployment benefits and all social care
Full obedience to all other EU-diktats to the smallest detail of micromanagement

To highlight this point again:

• Since the above pro-1% (Tory) policy is direct outcome of a country’s EU-membership – by which the corporatist EU has made it into EU’s constitutional law to pursue the global smash and grab scheme – a resounding Brexit vote would liberate the UK from the obligation to pursue above destructive policies, it would save the NHS, and NHS would save millions of lives in the UK.

Who is stronger in EU and who isn’t?
– The Smash and Grab agenda made into EU-policy –

The key consideration in understanding the motives behind EU’s economic policy that triggers crisis in its member-states, is a rarely heard, yet essential argument, which we can capture in the formerly quoted part of an Oxfam study:

There is also continuing evidence that the very richest are faring much better since the economic crisis.  At the
very top, Britain’s richest 1,000 individuals saw their wealth increase by £138bn in real terms between 2009 and 2013.  Even measures designed to stimulate the economy have resulted in significant gains for the richest
– the richest five per cent of households hold 40 per cent of the assets that increased in value as a direct result of quantitative easing. All the while, the poorest tenth are taking home even less.

Since EU has been and is imposing the very policy that generates both the crisis and inequality between the 1% and 99%, a most essential premise before formulating an argument either for or against Brexit, is the need to make a distinction between two antagonistic segments of society: the richest 1% – the political and finance-business elites – and the bulk of society, the 99% who actually do the value-adding work in any economy.

It follows from above that the idea that “UK is stronger or weaker in EU” is a sweeping generalisation. We can’t speak of UK stronger in or out of EU; we speak only in terms of who are stronger, which casts, classes, social-economic segments, different interest groups and the individuals comprising these.

This explains why the 1%, the Tory government and their subservient interest groups are campaigning in the Remain camp. Staying in EU will make them richer, at the expense of the 99% getting even poorer.

The strength and wealth of the richest does not make their country either strong or wealthy – to the contrary. The super-rich (not only in UK but all over the world) observe one and one goal only, to make themselves as individuals richer, even at the price of sentencing their fellow-citizens to abject poverty and death. Those who believe the “trickle-down” myth, that the top 1% getting stronger would make the whole of UK stronger, may want to look at again above Oxfam report – as well as this post on the topic – and may want to remember our empirical experience that whenever the 1% are getting stronger and wealthier, the 99% are gravely suffering. The ongoing crisis that has triggered vast inequality and poverty provides hard proof that the result of neoliberalism is the exact opposite of its “expected” trickle down effects.

Ever since the “crisis” of 2008 – in fact a series of hoax-events used as alibi for measures to increase the oppression of the 99% – we have witnessed how the subsequent artificially inflicted crisis triggered a historically unprecedented inequality via the rapid accumulation of wealth in the hands of a few and a parallel process of impoverishing the masses. The direct result of this new recession is a decadently luxuries life of the upper class, while the middle class is rapidly disappearing, and the working class is sinking into mass-poverty in a recklessly mismanaged, disorganised, failing and shrinking economy, ever increasing unemployment and vanishing welfare system, dismantled healthcare and social care.

• The very basis of the smash and grab agenda – and EU acts as an agent to impose this agenda – is exactly the actually expected result of neoliberalism: these policies bring crisis for the 99% while they deliver extra opportunities for the rich to get richer.

In above post it has been explained how and why the elites deliberately crafted the so-called “crisis” in 2008 and based on such hoax-premise they generated real crisis in each country. With reference to the phony premise – hoax crisis – a series of fraudulent government-loans have been imposed onto all countries within the EU.

Summary of the Smash and Grab global scheme

The premise of the scheme is a sequence of imposed fraudulent IMF-loans generating odious public Debt (Fraud) upon the allegation that there is Crisis in a country (Hoax).
Then the generated public Debt is used as “reason” for imposing Austerity which then triggers real economic Crisis (Smash) in the given country.
To allegedly alleviate the real Crisis, more IMF-loans are imposed with the binding obligation of the country to continue Austerity (more Smash) and by the obligation to allow the “creditor” Banks to seize all countries’ values, resources, lands, etc. via Privatisation (Grab).
That is, all assets of the planet are about to ‘return’ to those who impose these loans: the Bankers.

Above needs to be seen in the context of a former renowned banker’s “confession”. Andrew Mellon – US banker, Secretary of the Treasury 1921-32 – once famously said: “in a crisis, assets return to their rightful owners” (i.e. to the Banks). This fact evidently implies that crisis, which is tragedy, downturn and constant threat for the 99%, is a desirable, utterly positive phenomenon for the Banks.

“Coincidentally” enough, the very year – 2008 – when the so-called crisis hit the EU, is the same year when the EU Constitution (aka Lisbon Treaty) was secretly reinstated by a self-elected group – with Angela Merkel taking the lead of the secret project. For details of the shocking story, see post.

• Ever since this unelected group of elites have been exercising all state-powers over all EU countries, they consistently use the crisis as the alibi to impose Austerity, Cuts and Privatisations in every EU-country, including the UK.

This consideration leads us again to the conclusion that EU is an assembly of unelected servants of the global oligarchy, whose ultimate function is to impose the global smash and grab agenda onto all EU-member states. This is why EU get overly excited whenever an EU-country attempts to break free from the EU-grip.

All countries within the EU are obliged to observe the EU-imposed economic policy, by which the final goal is that these power-elites would grab all resources, supplies and services in Europe, thus taking over total control of the continent. Privatisation of essential resources and services of a country means monopoly over the most vital areas that no one can survive without. In the case an EU-country does not obey and refrain from such “adjustment efforts” the said country faces various forms of penalties which can be devastating financially, economically and morally to said EU-state.

An EU member state’s non-compliance with EU-law in general, results in grave consequences for said country. The EU is tight sinister dictatorship, by definition, the exact opposite of what it claims to be: a ‘loose union’. This explains why UK has been addressed so many major insults and threats upon considering leaving the EU.

Mystery: why would Labour vote for Tory EU?

The public myth that EU is a social-democratic international organisation led by a bunch of benevolent grannies who shall protect the UK masses from the reckless Tory scavengers wrecking the UK, is a most absurd fantasy-fiction that only those believe who live in another world.

In Labour MP Kate Hoey’s extraordinary, precise and concise speech depicting the true nature of the EU, she rightly emphasises that EU is a corporatist, pro-capitalist establishment; it is neither socialist nor democratic.

Once we recognise the real nature of EU upon the facts lined up in this article, that UK’s inequality and poverty are direct results of the shared EU-policy that helps the 1% to get richer while pushes the 99% towards abject poverty, the question why Labour wants UK remain in EU, becomes especially burning.

As we can see from the ample evidence laid out in this post, in reality the Tory UK Government is nothing but an affiliate to the Tory EU. Regardless of any claims of a progressive or leftist EU, in fact EU is an unelected assembly of corporate agents imposing an agenda that works against the very mission of Labour.

• Ever since the secret foundation of USE – total political-economic integration under the Lisbon Treaty – the present UK government has been nothing but a branch of regional EU-executives to enact laws for the enslaved UK within the EU-empire.

Once we realise that the anti-Labour laws and polices passed and implemented by Westminster are nothing but localised versions of the broad guidelines laid down in USE’s Lisbon Treaty – disguised EU-Constitution – it is evident that reclaiming UK’s independence is a profound reason for all Left-leaning voters to grab the opportunity and leave the USE.

Both UKIP and all reasonable representatives of Labour, rightly argue – and upon such argument won a recent media-hosted debate– that Brexit would be necessary to restore UK’s independence in the first place, since a country’s independent capacity to elect and/or discard the very individuals to pass law and implement policy a given country, is the absolute minimum premise of any country’s democracy.

• Conversely, a country that is subjected to the diktats of an unelected power-group – in this case the European Commission – that can’t be removed from office, is an enslaved colony under dictatorial control, by definition. And the dictatorial control does not even stop at EU-level, since EU is only a step towards a higher level integration of regions, such as the TTIP.

One might just keep wondering: why on earth would it be Labour’s “interest” to make UK, and its working masses, a helpless wreck to be sunk in the process of the ongoing imperialist power-grab over the whole planet?

• The entire package of threats and blackmails attached to a so-called uncertainty in the case of Brexit comes down to zero compared to the certain death of UK in the case it remains in EU. Moreover, the entire fear project proves to be mere bluff in light of what we learn from Norway’s leaders who faced the same threats and blackmails:
  (Lies told to Norway before they rejected EU membership [BREXIT] [VOTE EXIT] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i-UbT0g9A8c)

When the fear-mongering pro-EU campaigners raise the fallacious question, after Brexit from where we will get the money to finance the NHS and UK’s economy in general, the answer is simple: introduce public banking and start issuing £ for activities that are to serve the 99%, rather than the luxury-needs and warmongering agendas of the 1%.

Related Posts / References

#VoteLeave is the interest of the 99%- Summary of the main reasons for #Brexit #Lexit

The media-suppressed shocking story of how the EU/USE supranational state was founded

Hard figures to prove UK is better off with #Brexit: exposing the Remain camp’s scare tactics

Leave wins the #Brexit debate, the Remain camp is spreading gross misinformation

Further References

Brexit, Neoliberalism and the Eurozone: What Is at Stake in the British Referendum
http://www.globalresearch.ca/brexit-neoliberalism-and-the-eurozone-what-is-at-stake-in-the-british-referendum/5522380

Major leak from Brussels reveals NHS will be ‘KILLED OFF’ if Britain remains in the EU
http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/666454/NHS-EU-killed-off-Brexit-Remain-Leave-referendum-Brussels-European-Union

Oxfam: THE TRUE COST OF AUSTERITY AND INEQUALITY UK Case Study
https://www.oxfam.org/sites/www.oxfam.org/files/cs-true-cost-austerity-inequality-uk-120913-en.pdf

Economic policy
https://www.ecb.europa.eu/mopo/eaec/ecopolicy/html/index.en.html

Beckfield, Jason, “Working Paper, European integration and income inequality”
https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/95544/1/518878058.pdf

Austerity pushing Europe into social and economic decline, says Red Cross
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/oct/10/austerity-europe-debt-red-cross

The rising wave of privatisation damages healthcare in Europe
http://www.euractiv.com/section/health-consumers/opinion/the-rising-wave-of-privatisation-damages-healthcare-in-europe/

Lies told to Norway before they rejected EU membership [BREXIT] [VOTE EXIT]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i-UbT0g9A8c

Labour Leave MP Kate Hoey’s speech at the Spectator Brexit debate
https://soundcloud.com/spectator1828/kate-hoeys-speech-at-the-spectator-brexit-debate

Peter Lilley: Yes, I believe in free trade. But here’s why we must protect our NHS from TTIP
http://www.conservativehome.com/platform/2016/04/peter-lilley-yes-i-believe-in-free-trade-but-heres-why-we-must-protect-our-nhs-from-ttip.html

The Labour Case for Vote Leave
http://blog.politics.ox.ac.uk/labour-case-vote-leave/

Think Britain Can Opt Out Of ‘Ever Closer Union’? Think Again…
http://www.breitbart.com/london/2016/01/17/think-britain-can-opt-out-of-ever-closer-union-think-again/

The great austerity shell game
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/nov/04/great-austerity-shell-game

Taxi Drivers and Air Traffic Controllers Go on Strike in France
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/27/business/international/france-strike.html

France needs austerity, Juncker tells mayors
http://www.euractiv.com/section/euro-finance/news/france-needs-austerity-juncker-tells-mayors/

Further evidence that EU is a corporatist, anti-democratic machine of bribery:
Bloomberg gave £250,000 to Remain campaign
http://www.politico.eu/blogs/spence-on-media/2016/05/bloomberg-gave-250000-to-remain-campaign/

A Brief History of Neoliberalism – introduction
https://soundcloud.com/n-h-morgan/a-brief-history-of-neoliberalism-introduction