- Hardcover: 280 pages
- Publisher: Ashgate; illustrated edition edition (17 Mar 2008)
- Language English
- ISBN-10: 0754644146
- ISBN-13: 978-0754644149
- Product Dimensions: 23.6 x 15.5 x 2.3 cm
- Average Customer Review: 5.0 out of 5 stars See all reviews (1 customer review)
- Amazon Bestsellers Rank: 1,379,058 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)
- See Complete Table of Contents
Britain, the Euro and Beyond
and over one million other books are available for Amazon Kindle .
Learn more
| |||||||||||||||
Did you know you can trade in your old books for an Amazon.co.uk Gift Card to spend on the things you want? Plus, get an extra £5 Gift Certificate when you trade in books worth £10 or more before June 30, 2012. Visit the Books Trade-In Store for more details. |
Product details |
More About the Author
Product Description
Product Description
This important book provides an analysis of the economic relationship between Britain and the EU and discusses the future direction in which this relationship might develop. It examines the historic and contemporary costs and benefits of EU membership and assesses whether this has been a burden or a benefit for the British economy. In addition the authors assess current trends and developments, most notably in the area of participation in Economic and Monetary Union (EMU) and the consequences that this would have. Questions of fiscal federalism, the development of a minimum level of social policy for Europe, together with the likely impact on business and trade unions are also considered. The authors then discuss potential future scenarios, including a more flexible loose membership arrangement or complete withdrawal, and the affect that a range of options might have on the British economy.
About the Author
Mark Baimbridge is Senior Lecturer in Economics in the Department of Development and Economic Studies, School of Social and International Studies, University of Bradford, UK. Philip B. Whyman is Professor of Economics in the Department of Information and Finance, Lancashire Business School, University of Central Lancashire, UK.
Inside This Book
(Learn More)
First Sentence
The relationship between Britain and the European Union (EU) has been a difficult one over many decades, beginning with disinterest upon its formation, increasing desperation to gain membership when this appeared to guarantee superior economic performance, and latterly disquiet about the net drain that membership has upon the vitality of the national economy. Read the first page Browse Sample Pages
Front Cover | Copyright | Table of Contents | Excerpt | Index
The relationship between Britain and the European Union (EU) has been a difficult one over many decades, beginning with disinterest upon its formation, increasing desperation to gain membership when this appeared to guarantee superior economic performance, and latterly disquiet about the net drain that membership has upon the vitality of the national economy. Read the first page Browse Sample Pages
Front Cover | Copyright | Table of Contents | Excerpt | Index
Tag this product(What's this?)Think of a tag as a keyword or label you consider is strongly related to this product.
Tags will help all customers organise and find favourite items. |
Customer Reviews
Most Helpful Customer Reviews
1 of 1 people found the following review helpful
Format:Hardcover
In this original book, Mark Baimbridge, of the University of Bradford, and Philip Whyman, of the University of Central Lancashire, study the economic relationship between Britain and the EU. Part 1 includes a cost-benefit analysis of our EU membership, beyond anything that any government has ever dared to do. Parts 2 and 3 examine Economic and Monetary Union in theory and practice. Part 4 explores alternative futures for Britain, including an independent Britain, with alternative economic policies to promote our national economic development.
Their cost-benefit analysis concludes, "EU membership and the momentum towards deeper political and economic integration have consistently undermined UK national interests." From 1973 to 2000, our total cumulated trade deficit with the EU was £90.6 billion, while our trade with the rest of the world was £70.9 billion in surplus. This widening trade gap cost us more than a million manufacturing jobs. The Common Agricultural Policy raises the average family's food bill by £36 a week. We also lose out on the Common Fisheries Policy and the EU budget.
The authors argue that EMU's effects on us would be `overwhelmingly negative'. The conditions for joining would undermine the economy, while burdening British taxpayers. They sum up, "Economic growth would be stymied, unemployment would rise dramatically and the disaster of UK participation in the ERM would be repeated, but this time there would be no easy escape!"
EU supporters say that any autonomy is impossible under globalisation, so that we may as well give up our sovereignty to the EU. But when we left the Exchange Rate Mechanism (the rehearsal for EMU) in 1992, we were able to devalue the pound by 20%, so the economy grew and unemployment fell.
Now, however, the growing integration of the EU threatens what autonomy we still have. The EU Constitution would bind us more tightly, imposing EMU on us whether we like it or not. The authors propose instead that we could choose, as an independent sovereign nation, the economic strategy that we want, so we could rebuild industry to serve the interests of the people, not the minority `political and business elites'.
Their cost-benefit analysis concludes, "EU membership and the momentum towards deeper political and economic integration have consistently undermined UK national interests." From 1973 to 2000, our total cumulated trade deficit with the EU was £90.6 billion, while our trade with the rest of the world was £70.9 billion in surplus. This widening trade gap cost us more than a million manufacturing jobs. The Common Agricultural Policy raises the average family's food bill by £36 a week. We also lose out on the Common Fisheries Policy and the EU budget.
The authors argue that EMU's effects on us would be `overwhelmingly negative'. The conditions for joining would undermine the economy, while burdening British taxpayers. They sum up, "Economic growth would be stymied, unemployment would rise dramatically and the disaster of UK participation in the ERM would be repeated, but this time there would be no easy escape!"
EU supporters say that any autonomy is impossible under globalisation, so that we may as well give up our sovereignty to the EU. But when we left the Exchange Rate Mechanism (the rehearsal for EMU) in 1992, we were able to devalue the pound by 20%, so the economy grew and unemployment fell.
Now, however, the growing integration of the EU threatens what autonomy we still have. The EU Constitution would bind us more tightly, imposing EMU on us whether we like it or not. The authors propose instead that we could choose, as an independent sovereign nation, the economic strategy that we want, so we could rebuild industry to serve the interests of the people, not the minority `political and business elites'.
Most Helpful Customer Reviews on Amazon.com (beta)
Amazon.com:
1 review
Excellent cost/benefit analysis of Britain's membership of the EU
16 Jun 2008
Format:Hardcover
In this original book, Mark Baimbridge, of the University of Bradford, and Philip Whyman, of the University of Central Lancashire, study the economic relationship between Britain and the EU. Part 1 includes a cost-benefit analysis of our EU membership, beyond anything that any government has ever dared to do. Parts 2 and 3 examine Economic and Monetary Union in theory and practice. Part 4 explores alternative futures for Britain, including an independent Britain, with alternative economic policies to promote our national economic development.
Their cost-benefit analysis concludes, "EU membership and the momentum towards deeper political and economic integration have consistently undermined UK national interests." From 1973 to 2000, our total cumulated trade deficit with the EU was £90.6 billion, while our trade with the rest of the world was £70.9 billion in surplus. This widening trade gap cost us more than a million manufacturing jobs. The Common Agricultural Policy raises the average family's food bill by £36 a week. We also lose out on the Common Fisheries Policy and the EU budget.
The authors argue that EMU's effects on us would be `overwhelmingly negative'. The conditions for joining would undermine the economy, while burdening British taxpayers. They sum up, "Economic growth would be stymied, unemployment would rise dramatically and the disaster of UK participation in the ERM would be repeated, but this time there would be no easy escape!"
EU supporters say that any autonomy is impossible under globalisation, so that we may as well give up our sovereignty to the EU. But when we left the Exchange Rate Mechanism (the rehearsal for EMU) in 1992, we were able to devalue the pound by 20%, so the economy grew and unemployment fell.
Now, however, the growing integration of the EU threatens what autonomy we still have. The EU Constitution would bind us more tightly, imposing EMU on us whether we like it or not. The authors propose instead that we could choose, as an independent sovereign nation, the economic strategy that we want, so we could rebuild industry to serve the interests of the people, not the minority `political and business elites'.
Their cost-benefit analysis concludes, "EU membership and the momentum towards deeper political and economic integration have consistently undermined UK national interests." From 1973 to 2000, our total cumulated trade deficit with the EU was £90.6 billion, while our trade with the rest of the world was £70.9 billion in surplus. This widening trade gap cost us more than a million manufacturing jobs. The Common Agricultural Policy raises the average family's food bill by £36 a week. We also lose out on the Common Fisheries Policy and the EU budget.
The authors argue that EMU's effects on us would be `overwhelmingly negative'. The conditions for joining would undermine the economy, while burdening British taxpayers. They sum up, "Economic growth would be stymied, unemployment would rise dramatically and the disaster of UK participation in the ERM would be repeated, but this time there would be no easy escape!"
EU supporters say that any autonomy is impossible under globalisation, so that we may as well give up our sovereignty to the EU. But when we left the Exchange Rate Mechanism (the rehearsal for EMU) in 1992, we were able to devalue the pound by 20%, so the economy grew and unemployment fell.
Now, however, the growing integration of the EU threatens what autonomy we still have. The EU Constitution would bind us more tightly, imposing EMU on us whether we like it or not. The authors propose instead that we could choose, as an independent sovereign nation, the economic strategy that we want, so we could rebuild industry to serve the interests of the people, not the minority `political and business elites'.
Was this review helpful?
Let us know
Listmania!
Look for similar items by category
Look for similar items by subject
Feedback
- Would you like to update product info or give feedback on images?
- I am the Author, and I want to comment on my book.
- I am the Publisher, and I want to comment on this book.
|
