The EU-constitution & Lisbon
Treaty
Referendum & Poll Results
Under EU laws, if one of
its member states rejects a treaty, the EU is mandated to scrap the
bill. But the European Union's contempt for direct democracy is likely
to lead them to ignore the Irish referendum and pursue the
implementation of the Lisbon Treaty anyway - underscoring the fact that
the EU is nothing
more than an illegitimate autocracy of manufactured consent.
75% of people in the
EU want a referendum on any new treaty which gives more powers to the
EU. In the UK, 83% would want a vote to be held. A majority in all 27
countries would want a referendum.
If a new treaty is drawn up which gives
more powers to the EU do you
think that people should be given a say on this in a referendum or
citizen consultation
or do you think that it should just be up to the national
parliament to ratify this treaty?
Across the EU as a whole, 28% think the EU
should have more powers than it has now and that more decisions should
be taken at the European level. 23% think the EU should keep the powers
it has now, but should not be given any more. 41% think the EU should
have less powers than it has now and that more decisions should be
taken at a national or local level. In the UK the equivalent figures
were 11%, 27%, and 58% - a clear majority for taking powers back.
If there was a referendum on a treaty
giving new powers to the EU, on average 41% of people in the EU would
vote for it, with an exactly equal 41% voting against. But UK voters
would vote more than three to one against a such a new treaty (67% -
21%). Majorities would also vote “no” in 16 EU countries, including
Germany.
While
the Berlin Declaration is to cite the euro as one of the great
achievements of the EU, a majority of citizens in the eurozone want to
go back to their old national currencies. For the eurozone as a whole
47% wanted to keep the euro, but 49% wanted to go back to their old
currency. There is majority support for keeping the euro in only 6 out
of the 13 euro member countries.
If
there were a referendum, 11 out of the 14 non euro members would vote
not to join the euro. Opposition to joining in the UK is at its highest
ever: 77% – 19% against. Only Romania, Denmark and Malta would vote to
join.
Looking
at how the EU should change, across the EU as a whole, voters’ top
priorities were to establish clear fixed limits on the powers of the
EU, and to reduce the EU’s trade barriers against developing countries.
Their lowest priorities are the creation of an EU foreign minister,
further enlargement and CAP reform.
In
the UK, the voters’ top priority is to “turn the EU into just a simple
free trade area, without political aims”. Their bottom priority would
be the creation of an EU foreign minister.
For
the EU as a whole, 56% agreed with the statement that “the European
Union does not represent ordinary people in our country”. Only 34%
disagreed. In the UK the figures were 68% - 27%..
<>If the Eurocrats continue to ignore the
will of the people
as expressed in the NO-votes in three referenda in a row,
the EU looses all legitimacy and eurocrats therby underscore
that the EU is nothing more than an
illegitimate autocracy of manufactured consent.
|
Please also visit our  with free downmoads of :
|
|
|
 |
|
The Road
to Serfdom. This masterpiece of
Nobel Prize laureate Friedrich Hayek
is an eye-opener,
strongly advocating the free market principles. In this all-time
classic Hayek persuasively warns against the authoritarian utopias of
central planning and the welfare state. Fascism, communism and
socialism share these utopias. For the implementation of their plans
these authoritarian ideologies require government power over the
individual, inevitably leading to a totalitarian state. Every step away
from the free market toward planning reduces people's freedom and is a
step toward tyranny. Planning also cannot assess consumer preferences
with sufficient accuracy to efficiently co-ordinate production.
However in a free market, "Price" is the all-inclusive source of
information, guiding entrepreneurs to produce whatever is wanted and
directing workers wherever they are most needed. Free markets also
provide the entrepreneurial climate for a thriving economy and for
releasing the creative energy of its citizens. Free individuals in
their native strive to develop their talents and to improve their fate
produce spontaneous progress.
All public interference in the economic process disturbs the market
equilibrium, distorts the optimal allocation of resources and
consequently reduces the level of wealth. Where planning replaces free
markets people do not only loose their freedom and individuality.
Resulting slow
growth also increases welfare demands causing dependence similar to
slavery. In the end people's self-reliance and self-respect is ruined,
and citizens are degraded to a means to serve the ends of the
collective mass. |
|
Free condensed pdf
Comments
Dutch
Abstract
Overview
Paperback
Version
Readers'
Digest
More Books of
Friedrich
Hayek here |
|
The
Tragedy of the commons by Garrett
Hardin Free
access
and unrestricted demand for a finite resource ultimately
dooms the resource through over-exploitation. This occurs
because the benefits of exploitation accrue to individuals,
each of which is motivated to maximise his or her own use of
the resource, while the costs of exploitation are
distributed between all those to whom the resource is
available (which may be a wider class of individuals than
those who are exploiting it). The theory itself is as old as
Aristotle who said: "That which is common to the greatest
number has the least care bestowed upon
it. more
here
|
 |
| Ludwig Von
Mises: A Bundle of six short Essays.
(22 pages). In his usual easy-to-read style, Von Mises explains the
very basics of sound economics. The first essay vindicates the role of
capital goods and saving. Mises explains how saving inaugurates a
process toward prosperity. By consuming less than they produce, savers
furnish resources for investment in machines and tools which make the
laborers' efforts more efficient. Higher output per unit of input can
so be achieved. The productivity gain of such investment allows for
non-inflationary wage increases which is the sole road to real
progress and prosperty for all. Public policy should therefor favour
saving and investment, rather than stimulate growht through
inflationary easy money policies. In the second essay "The
Individual in Society"
Mises pleads for a free market economy based on division of labour and
strong property rights as the sole guarantee of liberty. For Mises,
government intervention implies compulsion, exactly the opposite of
liberty. In a market economy individuals are the supreme arbiters in
matters of their needs, both material and spiritual. They alone decide
what is more and what is less valuable. Central planning is unable
to assess the
individual's priorities so that planners permanently make wrong choices
lessening
consumer value and satisfaction. The government apparatus of
coercion is not only costly and inefficient. Many also consider state
compulsion as
unbearable. Other excellent
essays in this bundle: The Economics and Politics Of My Job,
The Elite Under Capitalism,
Facts about the Industrial Revolution
and The Gold Problem |
Free Download
here (pdf) |
...
many more free downloads in our
|
Do
You feel more people should read
this? Please
link this page or mail it to a friend
|
