When's the Dexit coming?
(the withdrawal of Germany from the EU)

Can the dexit still be prevented? How long do we intend to stick to the thesis of a prosperous EU?

The EU cannot be saved or reformed!
And that was exactly what I unequivocally expressed in a television interview for ARD. Of course, I also explained why. In principle, every state (as long as there is no global wage and tax equality) relies on customs duties to protect its economy. Even Greece could have a healthier country, if it could reduce import pressure through customs duties and thus build up an industrial base! A state which is at the mercy of unfair global dumping competition cannot survive in the long term. Whoever claims otherwise, deceives himself.
The other insoluble shortcomings of the EU were also mentioned in the interview, and I referred to the anti-democratic structure and the absurd bureaucracy. It's really not possible to talk nicely about all this anymore. 28 national self-interests cannot be reconciled. Who else wants to deny that?

All this and much more came across convincingly in the interview. The television team, who had travelled from far away, was enthusiastic. Fears that the TV superiors would not allow such an open statement against the EU seemed unfounded. After all, the EU's critical research was soon announced in the official programme previews with my interview. But only a few days before the broadcast, a powerful chief Indian (from politics or on ARD) must have pulled the rip cord. All my passages were cut out of the film and replaced by harmless (EU-friendly) propaganda. A rogue who thinks evil. In Germany there is no censorship? It would be nice.

Blind rapture....
The lack of honesty and openness in the media discourages the large majority of the population from thinking more deeply about the EU. Thanks to its tireless brainwashing, it has internalised the EU as a matter of course. The question of the usefulness or the raison d' être of the European Union does not even arise for most citizens. They simply can't imagine a resignation (a Dexit) (because the omnipresent media propaganda doesn't allow such a thought at all).The debate on the EU must always be about reform. After half a century of desperate efforts, it should gradually become clear that the EU is not reformable. Their very basic principle is contradictory, unworldly and illogical (that is why existing agreements and laws of Member States and the ECB are often ignored).

Those in favour of a strong Europe cannot approve of the EU!
Have you ever noticed the deception and insolence with which the EU is constantly equated with Europe? As if there is no difference between the two terms. Are Switzerland, Norway and soon England not counted among Europe?
When it is said time and again that "Europe must be saved", many profiteers are in reality concerned only with the EU, or more precisely with preserving their own benefactors (there are tens of thousands of highly paid EU officials, EU lobbyists, etc. in Brussels alone).

Many people are so fond of their superstition in the European Union that they no longer realize how much they hide the realities. How can we imagine that a Brussels supremacy with its insatiable regulatory frenzy could benefit the economy of the 28 EU states? How can we assume that a more democratic, almost obscure legislative machinery is helpful in the global competition of nations?

Mass unemployment and declining wages!
Even in the German model country, real net wages and pensions have fallen since 1980, although productivity has doubled in the same period. And the number of unemployed has tripled since 1980, despite all the concealing balance-sheet cosmetics! Are these sad trends perceived by the majority of the population? The constant messages of rejoicing ("Germany benefits particularly from the EU and the euro" or "We have never been better off than we are today") form the basis of an unprecedented rhetoric of repression. Objective arguments are nipped in the bud and no longer even penetrate the consciousness of authoritarian wealthy citizens. EU critics are slandered as democrats, racists or dumbasses or are seen as nagging spoilers.

Only the glut of cheap money is preventing the collapse at the moment!
Don't kid yourself: Only the high-risk, low-cost flooding of money (which I am not the only one who thinks is irresponsible) hides the true extent of the catastrophe that is looming. Only thanks to the glut of cheap money can many euro states still keep their gigantic national debts in check. Only thanks to the glut of low-cost money was an artificial economy created that hides the true extent of the misery in a makeshift way.
However, the last trump card came with a glut of cheap money, and the hand was completely exhausted. If a bubble of speculation, heated up by the glut of cheap money, bursts, it becomes really gloomy.
But anyway: In the long run, a glut of cheap money that lacks any seriousness and morality in monetary policy terms cannot survive. This is also because it runs counter to all the principles of an efficient market economy.

Blind egoism ...
The superstition about the need for an EU is also fueled by entrepreneurs who are looking for skilled workers in the EU low-wage labor market. Because they allegedly find no more in Germany.
It must be said that a shortage of skilled workers only exists if wages are too low. Due to poor pay, some professions are now unattractive. Why truckers, geriatricians, craftsmen, doctors or whatever will become, if the payment does not meet the high performance requirements. Since you are looking for a more comfortable or socially respected profession.

Immigrants from EU low-wage countries (freedom of establishment) are therefore only needed to keep the wage level in the shortage occupations low.
Immigrants from EU low-wage countries (freedom of establishment) are therefore only needed in order to keep wage levels in the understaffed professions low.The entrepreneurs complain that higher wages are simply not possible, the market does not even give that away. That's total bullshit, of course. After all, the competition is also subject to market laws. So if truck drivers earn more money, transport would generally become more expensive.
This slightly shifts the costing base. The general fanaticism of centralisation would be weakened somewhat, and some production outsourcing abroad would no longer be profitable, and the flat-rate shipping charges for Internet orders would be increased.
At the same time, however, social costs would also be saved (probably to a much greater extent) because many large families from the EU low-wage country (which often live wholly or partly on Hartz IV) would not even immigrate to Germany in the first place.
The media conceals these connections. Thousands of times the complaints of poor entrepreneurs are staged, who cannot find people. It is obviously only a matter of underpinning the supposed necessity of the EU.

Does Germany live from EU exports?
At least a thousand times a year, the media make the claim that Germany as an export nation is dependent on the EU. That is why the prejudice that we are the EU's great beneficiaries (parasites) is also persistent in neighbouring countries. This in turn stirs up envy and resentment and, of course, the attitude towards us. But it is true:
1. No EU is needed to trade. After all, Germany delivers its goods everywhere, even to distant China or the USA.
2. Trade in Europe was not invented with the EU, it already existed before.
3. If there is an export dependency, that would be fruitful. Then foreign crises would have an immediate impact on our economy. We would have to live in constant fear, be dragged into chaos.
4. A responsible federal government should therefore always strive to preserve its economic autonomy as much as possible. This provides stability and security.

Either Dexit or the EU collapses?
Most people are probably familiar with the phrase "The EU does not work - unless Germany pays! The only thing is: Germany's resources are limited. Nor will it be possible to keep our majority of the population in check with dubious success stories. Resistance in Germany to the EU will grow steadily. It doesn't help much to mock the internet as a fake news base. In the end, the critical citizen recognizes whether arguments are valid or not.
In order not to leave the field to the AfD, the established parties will give in over time, i. e. become more realistic (EU-critical). The situation will be similar to that of mass immigration in 2015/2016: first, the welcome culture was intoxicated and then disillusionment followed (separation). Because the established parties have been caught up with reality.

President Macron is talking about a new foundation!
I am sure you have already noticed how strongly France's EU-friendly President is insisting on the establishment of a new European Union. But what does this new foundation mean? Isn't it an admission of failure? Do you hope to do everything better the next time you try?
But I do not think that there can be an EU that works in the long term. The contradictions are simply too great and the interests of the EU Member States are too different. In a few decades' time we will have to admit another failure. Will there be another experiment? How often and for how long will EU citizens be put off and delayed?
Will it ever be admitted that the EU is a counterproductive monster that only serves the big global players and supports their desire for expansion and monopolization?

Dexit or dissolution of the EU?
The simpler way would certainly be the Dexit. After all, Germany can decide for itself whether to resign. It is best to wait and see how the brexite works. If, in a few years' time, the British are better off than they were before (which is to be expected), the EU withdrawal loses its horror and the stupidly impudent continuous propaganda of the EU lobby loses its credibility.
An orderly dissolution of the EU as a whole would not be bad either, but it seems to me to be far less likely (because some states still hope to benefit from the EU subsidy policy and the transfer union).
There is, of course, a third option, namely the risk of the EU collapsing. This could be triggered by a global economic crisis or by the ECB's adventurous policy with its glut of cheap money.

What does the EU actually bring us? What are the main features of the EU? What distinguishes the international community from conventional, sovereign states? • creation of the internal market, elimination of customs duties The core of the EU is the abolition of customs frontiers. But what does this change do? 1. Firstly, it increases wage and tax dumping. European competition is becoming more unfair. How is a German medium-sized company to survive in the long term if its competitor abroad has only a fraction of the labour costs? 2. Beneficiaries are the major global players, who can now simply outsource large parts of their production to the EU's low-wage country. 3. The EU internal market expands the sales markets of German and foreign global players. But don't be mistaken - this is not a win-win situation. In return, regional manufacturers are being pushed out of the market. So monopoly formation is being promoted. 4. Large groups have better opportunities to avoid tax payments than small and medium-sized enterprises (tax evasion, relocation of profits to tax havens, etc.). The tax burden on the population is therefore increasing. 5. The outsourcing of production parts to low-wage countries and the extinction of regional manufacturers multiply the transport volume. The result: significant increases in health and environmental damage. • The EU creates open borders What changes as a result? 1. commuters and holidaymakers no longer need to identify themselves when crossing the border. Theoretically, this saves you a few minutes of time. In practice, however, traffic volumes are increasing due to the boundless freedom of movement, which inhibits the flow of traffic and causes congestion. The bottom line is that there is no time saved, the exact opposite is happening. 2. Open borders are gratefully accepted by criminals. Their work is considerably facilitated. Another reason is that prosecution and conviction of foreign offenders is far more difficult. 3. Open frontiers open the door to VAT fraud. For real or fake exports there are substantial refunds, while undeclared, imported goods are exempt from the due VAT. • The Brussels flood of paragraphs burdens the economy Because EU bureaucrats think they have to regulate everything, the continent is sinking into the garbage dump. This not only complicates national legislation, it also burdens the citizens and, above all, the economy. Costs increase, productivity decreases. Small and medium-sized enterprises in particular are barely able to cope with the legal requirements. • The escalating subsiditis weakens the market economy Subsidies are not only expensive, they also lead to disastrous misdirection of the economy. The EU uses subsidies as a gigantic propaganda programme. The beneficiaries believe that they owe much to the EU. Each subsidy euro must be worked hard. The anonymous taxpayer (the parcel deliverer, bricklayer, pensioner, elderly person) has to cut the money off from the meagre income, so that it can then be distributed generously and often without real control. • The EU weakens democracy and political capacity to act The voice of a Maltese or Luxemburger counts ten times more than that of a German. Negotiations are often conducted in secret, with the public being kept out of the loop, and the EU's intertwined decision-making levels are in any case incomprehensible to the layman. It is downright ridiculous when lobbyists with high wages sound, it would take the EU to uphold democracy. In addition, the Brussels guardianship affects the ability of national governments to act (80% of German laws are EU-related). • The EU creates discord! Even French President Macron, who is pro-European, sees the present EU as a European civil war. Solidarity is rare, egoism is rampant everywhere, envy and resentment are spreading. And the aspirations for autonomy in some regions are also increasing. For example, would the Catalans or Scots wish to separate themselves from their motherland if the EU did not exist? Certainly not! Similarly, the separation and civil war in Ukraine was presumably only because the country suddenly sought EU membership (against which the Russian part of the population resisted). • The EU gave us the euro Even the world-famous DM was abolished (against the will of the population). The euro countries now lack the economically most important control instrument as a result of this single currency. A troubled eurozone can no longer regain its competitiveness through a devaluation, even an individual interest rate policy is excluded. Wherever this insanity leads, shows the real practice: gigantic debt relief was necessary, the ECB sought their salvation in a high-risk cheap glut (= creeping expropriation of savers and devaluation of private pensions), bought even on a large scale government bonds and stopped itself iron rules and promises (on which the euro was based). Nobody knows how to get out of this number. One is not even able to initiate an interest rate turnaround. • Result - Conclusion Even though the mighty EU lobby (the media and "established" parties) still euphemisms so much, talking around the hottest talk and throwing smoke candles: How can anyone, when arguing objectively, think that the EU is necessary, useful or worth preserving? All the essential points are against it.

The counterarguments of the all-powerful EU lobby

• "The withdrawal of Germany from the EU would lead to chaos on the financial markets.
"This claim has already been refuted by the brexite. Where is there chaos? The EU's supporters are therefore only concerned with spreading panic and stirring up fears. The fact that the financial markets, of all things, are brought into play as the main argument is more than bold: The euro in particular is proving to be the epitome of an adventurous monetary policy (with an unknown outcome).

• It is assumed that a dexit could lead to currency devaluation
driving inflation. Others fear the opposite, i. e. an appreciation of the DM, which would make German exports more expensive.
However (I think it's more likely to be upgraded): all this is a coffee grounds reading. In addition, currency fluctuations are something quite normal and necessary. Because they help to balance trade and current account balances. All trading partners should be interested in this balance.

• "Germany would presumably lose its strong position as an economic power after a dexit."
But this suspicion contradicts any logic! If our state is no longer subject to the Brussels dictates, if it can free itself from the flood of European paragraphs with its counterproductive subsidy policy, then that is only an advantage!
More importantly, however, an independent, free state can protect itself against European and global unfair competition (wage, tax, eco and social dumping) through import duties. It may also have its own currency again, it does not have to support Euro-partners through debt relief and transfer huge sums of money to Brussels. He is then no longer forced to take part in a ruinous, adventurous flood of cheap money.

In principle, it is noticeable that the EU panic orchestra is stirring up fears with contingencies. It" could","it would be possible" etc... Such a rhetoric is not very serious, because there is absolutely nothing that "could not happen" (the earth could explode tomorrow, the sky might collapse above the earth, extraterrestrials "could" conquer the world). It is therefore less about what could not be everything, what is important, what is probable and can be expected under normal circumstances.

• Another thesis: As an exporting nation, Germany is the main beneficiary of the EU.
And that is something you dare to say, even though it is well known that wages and pensions in this country have fallen since 1980 (in contrast to many other EU countries) and unemployment figures have increased tenfold in the last 50 years.
Once again, if you export a lot, you also have to import a lot of things (a large imbalance is unacceptable in the long run). And export dependency is anything but desirable, and it does not promote prosperity. The country is living on an eternal powder keg with the madness of exports. One must constantly be afraid of being overtaken by other countries and losing markets. And a "exporting country" is doubly and threefold affected by a global economic crisis.

• "The weak EU countries lack German development aid after the dexit."
Poland, for example, receives an annual net transfer of 15 billion euros via the EU. Of course, this sum could not be raised after a dexit. But would that be so bad? After all, Poland's economy is also suffering from the misdirection of subsidy policy.
In addition, Poland could also leave the EU and get rid of the Brussels bureaucracy. That would be a tremendous liberation strike! As a genuinely sovereign state, Poland would also be able to impose overdue protective duties in order to finally remove its industry from unfair global dumping competition.

• "Without access to the EU single market, 360 million consumers would be lost!"
If sovereign states like Japan, China, the USA, Britain no longer have access to the EU, can they no longer sell anything there? That would be new to me. How can you spread such a nonsense!

• "58 % of German exports go to EU countries."
Yes and further? It is not uncommon for closer economic contacts with neighboring countries. But this was already the case in front of the EU and is common worldwide. And with the British going out, the flattering 58% quota goes down anyway. I repeat it again: exports are not a one-way street, they usually lead to correspondingly high imports (ie import dependency).

• "Dexit will weaken Europe!"
The Dexit will weaken the EU - but not Europe (these two terms are often mistaken for each other). The Dexit would presumably be the beginning of the EU's end: the disastrous union would sooner or later dissolve after Germany's departure, thus ending the European nightmare.
This should strengthen Europe considerably. If they were sovereign, all countries could have long since reached the German level of prosperity, and could protect their economies through customs duties against the overwhelming competition of global players and low-wage countries in the Far East.

• "Customs barriers and border controls could come back!"
Is that supposed to be a warning or a promise? The rebuilding of customs barriers and border controls is precisely what the Dexit is all about. Because a sovereign, capable state relies on these standards of fundamental rights that are common throughout the world.

• "Foreign investment funds would no longer flow to Germany!"
Why the hell not? Germany is one of the economically and politically most stable states in the world. And this is exactly where there should be no more money? Just ridiculous!

• "Anti-German resentment could boil up again!"
Resentment has been around for a long time, precisely because of the EU! Because many EU countries think that we are overly advantageous. Germany itself contributes to this false impression with its boastful propaganda of success (supposedly low unemployment rate, high trade surplus, etc.).
After the Dexit, no one could accuse us of being parasites or fear to be patronised or taken over by Mrs Merkel. In order to further improve its reputation in Europe, Germany could provide generous aid in the form of the Marshall Plan. This would be cheaper than the current EU transfers and would be more honest and certainly also far more effective.

3:97
If you look at it soberly, only about 3% of all serious arguments speak in favour, but 97% are against the EU. The sublime waffle, the exalted transfigured - all this turns out to be beguiling siren chanting on closer inspection.
Anyone who, on the one hand, sounds (Macron), the EU "combines democracy with a market economy, individual freedoms with social justice", but at the same time speaks of a European civil war ("we do not want to admit its existence") and demands a new foundation of the EU, has, in my opinion, lost his credibility.

I consider it irresponsible, in view of decades of experimentation, to instill the (insensitive) hope of being able to reform the EU after all! The EU is getting more and more lost in bureaucratic aberrations with the constant cobblestones. The euro, for example, was once used to save the EU. And what happened to it?
The EU is so complex that it is difficult to see through and assess, at least for ordinary citizens as a whole. Everyone understands something different. It is only because of this obscurity and ignorance that the EU is still sustainable and can be kept in check to a certain extent. In the meantime, however, even in Germany, one in three German citizens now outnumber themselves as opponents of the EU.

"Raus aus der EU (out of the EU)" - why I wrote the book.
Certainly not in order to earn money with it (I will never get the investment in the project back in again. However, it is important to me that the eternal whitewashing and rape of the truth finally come to an end. The brainwashing fake propaganda of the all-powerful EU lobby is to be disenchanted with concrete arguments.

It would still be possible to avert the catastrophe that is rolling towards Europe (which is currently only kept in check by the flood of cheap money). But this can only succeed if our continent awakens from its sleeping beauty and EU citizens no longer allow themselves to be lulled and learn to distinguish between fiction and reality. I, for one, have done my duty with this booklet. Let no one say afterwards that they could not have known all this.

 Excuse me!
There is no equality of opportunity - even when it comes to forming opinions. While the capital (corporations, speculators, lobbyists, media, governments) can afford the best translators, I have to settle for a simple language program for financial reasons. I hope, however, that the text is nevertheless reasonably understandable and that no major mistakes have occurred. Thank you for your understanding.
Manfred Julius Müller, 24939 Flensburg (Flensburg has approx. 90,000 inhabitants and lies on the German-Danish border)

My websites are absolutely non-partisan and independent!
They are not sponsored by state institutions, global players, corporations, associations, parties, unions, aid organizations, NGOs, the EU or capital lobby, hyped by google or influenced by the cancel culture movement! They are also free of advertising and fees.

Background and analysis:
• German Political Encyclopedia: independent & non-partisan
• Do doctored statistics and state propaganda form the basis of our democracy?
• Poverty research: Which countries with high birth rates are really doing well?
• The infiltration of democracy by the Cancel Culture movement …
• The nasty tricks of the anti-democrats!
• Causes and consequences of global economic crisis
• In Germany wages have been falling since 1980. Why?
• Germany: The brazen proclamation of skills shortage!
• Globalization: the ignorance of the facts
• The political and economic consequences of an brexit An analytical consideration from German view.
• "We have to explain Europe better!"
• When will the Dexit? (the withdrawal of Germany from the EU)
• The rule of law becomes a laughing stock

Bitte aktivieren Sie den Translater! • Ist die Welt nur über den Zoll zu retten und brauchen wir auch innerhalb der EU wieder Zölle? • Trügerischer Wirtschaftsboom: Wann zerfällt das Kartenhaus aus Billiggeldschwemme, Nullzinspolitik und Währungsdumping? • Die Tricks bei der Berechnung der deutschen Arbeitslosenzahlen • Ist der Kapitalismus reformierbar? • Vor allem die Bevölkerungsexplosion ist Schuld am Klimawandel! • Sind EU und Weltwirtschaft nur über eine Billiggeldschwemme zu retten? • Was kommt nun: Ein harter oder ein weicher Brexit? • Wie Demagogen die Öffentlichkeit manipulieren... • Die EU ist demokratiefeindlich! • Wann kommt der Dexit? (der Austritt Deutschlands aus der EU) • Wie ehrlich sind die Grünen? • Das kapitalistische Ermächtigungsgesetz • Warum ist eine Mehrheit der deutschen Bevölkerung noch immer für die EU? • Ist die EU noch reformierbar? • Ist die Europäische Union gescheitert? • Ist das deutsche Existenzminimum eine Zumutung? • Schluss mit der Exportabhängigkeit! • Fake News verbreiten immer nur die anderen! • Wie verlaufen Finanzkrisen? (ausführliche Abhandlung) • Das Scheitern des Westens - Ergebnis der Freihandels-Ideologie? • Freitagsdemo: Demonstrieren für den Klimaschutz? • Ja, es gibt in Deutschland eine Spaltung der Gesellschaft … • Die 3 großen Nachteile der Globalisierung • Die Auswirkungen der Globalisierung auf die Entwicklungsländer • Macht die Globalisierung Produkte billiger? • Wie ehrlich ist die deutsche Handelsbilanz? • Dominieren die Medienkonzerne auch schon das Internet? • Die Inflationierung und Vergewaltigung der Menschenrechte... • Die Zensur der Medien bei der Auswahl der Nachrichten! • Politik der Mitte? Wer bestimmt, was links und was rechts ist? • Manipuliert das deutsche Staatsfernsehen die öffentliche Meinungsbildung? • Strafzölle - wer soll da eigentlich bestraft werden? • Leitet Donald Trump das Ende der Globalisierung ein? • Vergangenheitsbewältigung: "Wir Deutsche müssen aus der Geschichte lernen…" • Die Instrumentalisierung der Weltoffenheit. • Ursachen und Folgen der Weltwirtschaftskrisen • Profitiert Deutschland von der Zuwanderung?

Impressum

© Manfred J. Müller, Flensburg, Dezember 2012, Nachtrag Mai/Juni 2016

Manfred J. Müller has been analyzing global economic processes for 40 years. He is considered a pioneering thinker. For example, 20 years ago he called for a kind of supply chain law that obliges manufacturers and dealers to only import fairly remunerated and produced goods to Germany (finally became law in May 2021). He has also long recommended a minimum profits tax for large companies on domestic sales (Joe Biden's proposal for a global minimum profits tax in spring 2021 is finally moving in the same direction, but is far too lame and will hardly be implemented internationally). Manfred J. Müller has also been fighting for his idea of wage cost reform for three decades (gradual reduction of social security contributions with counter-financing through value added tax and customs duties).

Through decades of brainwashing, the corporate lobby has succeeded in making radical ideologies a matter of course! Through an army of loyal politicians and sympathetic journalists and the superiority of their opinion factories, system-owned economic institutes producing desired statistics, etc., they have brought about social changes and laws that only serve their special interests. This can be seen, for example, in the development of earned income (real net wages and pensions have been falling in Germany since 1980) on the one hand and the gigantic jumps in profits on the other (such as with shares and dividends). Should it always go on like this? A critical look behind the scenes of political machinations: The dreaded books by Manfred Julius Müller...